This is THE position to take in the face of a lack of evidence. The other position is called faith. Looks like psychoticstorm cleared things up for us, however lol
There was already tons of incontrovertible evidence for it though. It's not a matter of faith, it's that empirical observation of point costs breaks down consistently every time. If you didn't accept the evidence, that's on you.
If there is a formula it obviously is not as balanced as Gutier thinks it is when you can game it like there is no tomorrow because there are skills and equipment that are much more cost effective than the rest f.e. linked Frenzy or Chains or Mimetism
I don't think it could ever be "balanced" though. That would just lead to homogenization of profiles across the board. There is some stuff that definitely could be fixed though -- SMGs should be nerfed by a point or two, Mimetism is too cheap/should scale with unit cost harder, irregular/ex. impetuous is too cheap when combined, and Jammers should be twice as much as they cost right now.
Agree 100% with your comment, there are problematic skills/equipment that everybody knows are too cheap.
You can't have a points formula so exact that it does the hard work of balancing for you. It's just not possible. Designers still have to design things within the constraints they have to make sense in the army they are being put into, etc.
I can only speak for the US but you can't copyright game rules, only things like the story and images. It's absolutely in CB's best interests to keep the formula a secret.
Quoted for truth! I hate to say it but when I have worked with point systems they worked best as a starting point and even then as something of a crutch. Except anyone who actually wants to use it is just going to crack it anyway and pretty fast I might add. People literaly do this kind of puzzle for fun. They are not doing to stop rival's, and to be blunt they would be better off without it anyway lol. However if they don't want it posted here that can be respected. Still what a goofy request lol.
Their sandpit, their rules. You agreed to abide by their rules upon signing up. Your frozen peaches are not being impinged upon if they tell you to stop doing it, so stop doing it.
A few points: 1. People have said "wait and see" for years, as long as I have been in these forums, and there is some credit to that. Acontecimento, Bakunin, Tohaa, ISS and other factions have received (sometimes generous) facelifts. However, many go unattended while the staff works on things that excite them, and occasional edits to factions (Morats, QK, MO) or units (Bolts, Ectros, Pheasant) are far more flavorless or haphazard than the other edits we see. There will always be fans against the trend, of course (I love updated Ectros), but the exception proves the rule: People have complained broadly against Bolts for four years, at least. PanOceanian cynicism was the correct presumption by the past two publications. It is not unreasonable to be cynical again. 2, "Taxes" and "discounts" are a concession of a flawed formula. Does "flawed" mean "unplayable" or "unpalatable"? No, of course not. But no one is a fool for pointing out the poor formula optimization of a Bolt, compared to a Tanko or Sakiel. The fact that a Fatality L2 SMG Nanopulser Blitzen Forward Observer Fusilier, would be 1 point cheaper than a Combi Fusilier, is condemnation of its credibility. 3. We are customers, not tributaries. WarCors, in particular, due to the pride of their position, or due to whatever goodie gotten, have, for years, seemed quizzical that Infinity players are not grateful for what they have paid for. That "eat your slop, piggie" attitude is exactly what sunk modern Comics and Star Wars. We do not owe an entertainment company anything. No one was obliged to like old Securitate, no is obliged to like modern Sepulchre Knights. We the customers could fire everyone at CB by spending our money elsewhere. If CB sinks Ramah and Varuna, that will be CB's fault, not CB's fans.
I'm not sure what narrative you subscribe to, but I would not put Star Wars and comics in the same boat there... The Force Awakens is like the third highest grossing movie of all time (as of this writing, though Avengers Infinity War is likely to pass it soon.) I think that this example points out a couple things, which is that 1) the formula doesn't take thought out of unit design, because still do have units that are really bad, bloaty profiles, but also some units that are incredibly powerful for their cost, 2) that one point skills especially suffer from this, and that 3) Combis are a bit overpriced, given that we know there are cheaper options that are literally better in every way (rifle+LSG).
When/If there are no customers, there is no company. Shrug, not saying thats the point where at, but its certainly a demonstrable point.
I dont think thats fair, theres certainly enough warcors that have issues with the way some of this is being handled
Yet again guess which faction overpays through a nose with a Combi+Assault Pistol combo (which is atrocity when it comes to unit design).
If there wasn't a formula, we wouldn't be able to reverse-engineer a consistent point-cost for things. Another game I played way back when was Star Fleet Battles. The game is written by engineers, and their points formula actually accounts for range. One particular ship, if it was really up close and personal, was admitted to have a points cost about 20% greater than it normally had. But writing a points formula like that requires someone who knows and groks calculus and statistics. Yeah, my friends reverse-engineered the N1/N2 formula in about 4 hours. It's not hard, mostly because all the prices were whole numbers and there were always units that had some skill by itself. It's a bit harder now. Hey, they did ask politely. Do you remember the old Armorcast models for 40k? This would have been about 20 years ago, maybe more. Armorcast was putting vehicle stat cards into their boxes, with rules and points for 2e 40k. Those points were regarded as terribly broken, much too cheap for the abilities given. Forgeworld models had some of the same problems for a long time, which is why they were 'opponent's permission' items. By keeping the whole points formula secret, they can prevent those issues from popping up in the first place. Ep7 wasn't bad. Wasn't great, but did almost make up for Meesa Darth Jarjar. JJ Abrams did an OK job setting up the ending trilogy. What about Solo and Last Jedi, though? Solo is so bad that it is the first Disney movie to have lost money. Ever. Last Jedi didn't really even pick up the storyline from where Force Awakens left off. In terms of trilogies, the first movie introduces the characters and sets up the bigbad in the second movie. In the second movie, the heroes are supposed to lose (Empire Strikes Back). And then the heroes struggle mightily to defeat the bigbad in the third film.
That argument only works if you are correct and something like Bolt's need fixing. Simply wanting them improved doesn't count. Maybe CB wants Bolt's to provide the bare minimum in their role like Mobile Brigada. So on one hand the community is correct certain units are weak but on the other hand they don't see the forest through the trees. At some point I'm sure Bolt's will need improving as power creep continues. Timelines are also very subjective. I have no idea how long of a wait is reasonable. It would require knowing when a factions power level drops to an unacceptable level. All I can say for certain is I frequent other games that evolve over time and players are impatient. Companies like CB will work on what they feel is important first. So while players are free to be cynical, it will be extremely difficult to prove whether that cynicism was justified or not. What does "the exception proves the rule" mean? I doubt anyone thinks Infinity's formula is perfect. But it's far better than the one I haven't created for a game with all of Infinities strengths. I agree that I'm a customer, not a tributary. But i'm grateful for all of Infinity's wonderful elements that make me smile like no other game does. I'm also not blind to it's faults. I will stop spending my money when the game becomes no fun anymore or a better game is made. However IMO, there are far bigger issues than the points formula to worry about. The game rules being my 'hill to die on' as it were. I enjoyed Solo and was sad to see it do poorly. But I'm someone who hasn't cared about the Star Wars franchise since the original three.
I think the biggest damning point against Bolts, and proof positive that what CB expected of them was vastly different from what they managed to create, is that there is no other unit in the entire range with as many models (9). For a unit that sees occasional use in specific missions geared towards its strengths, and in very specialised lists, there are far too many models available.
Well for sure Bolts are selling decently as they have 3 models in NCA starter box. And CB had to put yet another Bolt into Beyond box as there wa no other specialist in PanO within 20pts range (except for just resculped Bagh-Mari). Quite hilarious. And this assumption is based on ? I not that old but I saw enough to be extremaly suspicious towards such naive assumptions. Exacrtly what it says. For a exception to exist, there must be a rule the exception derrives from.
