There was/is more talk of Crimson Stone in the Infinity forums than here. Granted it was more so for what the models look like but still... Is this a somewhat sad statement of where C1 is amongst players? I know newer players do not really go to forums, or at least do not go outside of a local facebook/discord groups but is the lack of topics/discussion on the official Code One boards fairly reflect the games' community?
Well....we don't intro new players with Code One in our community, we use smaller point values and introduce concepts while increasing points values. I don't think anyone really plays that rules edition out here tbh.
Yeah, I do that too... have been doing that, for the past few years. I honestly feel like you could just teach N4 in pieces just as well as playing a normal game of C1.
I think C1 was a mistake. They should have just included more guidelines on introducing rules and not bothered with it. They really need to focus on Linkteam rules rework and getting models of profiles released. This one model to cover 5 purifies is dumb unless they start including variant weapons in the blister.
Same here. Code 1 doesn't really have any place in an established community, it's functionally only any good for literal baby's first wargame with a community that hasn't done table top wargaming before. That's the kind of target audience it has, which is also probably a group of people who aren't going to be established on CB forums.
There is one guy I play C1 with. He is learning the game and doesn’t have a community where he lives. We’ve probably played 4 games of C1. I anticipate that after another 2 or 3 games we will move on to full on N4. I am also just starting to teach my oldest kid, who is 8, how to play. C1 seems to be a very easy way to teach the game. Literally just starting with 3 models or so in a game per side. The value in C1, in my opinion, is not in the game system but in the distribution. Makes it easy for a retailer to stock a core selection of Infinity product. A new player can walk in and they can definitively say, buy this and you’re set for C1.
I would also suggest that it is losing out to GW in that regard. Between eye catching models, boxes, and omni present community that's where new gamers tend to gravitate.
'cause these are the introduction rules and we're fans of the full rules set first and foremost maybe? Not sure how this can be sad state of affairs for anything
Mate, here's a blunt truth: C1 has literally nothing to with introducing anything to new players, that's actually a smoke screen of why it was introduced. The actual reason why C1 was made, was because local gaming stores had no F'ing clue on what to stock on the constant releases and massive flows of SKU's from Infinity. CB will tell local stores to keep everything C1 in stock as "core products" and everything else is something "extra" that the store is free to stock and/or back order. This is much simpler for stores who wish to stock CB products to understand, because otherwise they risk filling massive shelves of "dead" boxes in the store that never gets sold. In other words, C1 is not really a "thing" community wise, because besides from being simpler for local stores, it's also more easy for new players who know little about infinity and want to play it straight out of the box.
I fail to understand how can an "introductory ruleset" have rules opposing the full product: https://infinitythewiki.com/MediKit (N4) https://infinitythewiki.com/MediKit (C1) So if you manage to fire a medikit with B>1 in C1, and the target fails a single PH roll, the target dies. However, in N4 if the Medikit has a B>1, the target needs but a single PH success to go back to 1 Wound. The fact that no correction to C1 has been made and no errata published, even that nothing but Army profiles (copy-pasted from N4 as the Corregidor Alguacile Lt in C1's Army costing 1SWC and making the box illegal at 15pts, Vs the datacard of Crimson Stone costing 0 SWC) and models used in N4 get released points to that. Don't get me wrong, it's a great (if not perfect, because of the contradictions with the full ruleset) "minimal effort, big return" line of products, but only people with no Infinity community whatsoever would start with C1. And TTS has moved the "no community" to "power up your computer". And I miss the "shrug" emoji ^^
Don't think that has anything to do with that N4 side of things is getting (a whole friggin' bunch) more attention from the community when there's a "C1 release" ;)
If it makes you feel better, I personally haven’t yet found a scenario in C1 that lets you get greater than Burst 1 with a medikit.
I have so much to rant about this. I had to stop and just keep to this. The short answer: CB is bad at making the game accessible. New players don't know what to buy, and are legit sold bad profiles (looking at you Combined Army Booster Alpha....just why). Stores don't have it any better. Labelling things Code One but not fixing the above issues doesn't help.
Yes and No. I’m not sure I’ve ever played a war game where one year after I started I still thought the same things were good/bad. Is it a feel bad to tell a new person, just buy C1 stuff, learn the game, then figure out what you actually want to play, then buy that stuff? Sure. But I’m not really sure what a better system would be. What I love about Infinity is all the unique models/profiles. I don’t want to paint 80 Space Marines and then learn I need to paint 60 Primaris Space Marines. But that makes a stupid logistical nightmare. With the new people I’ve brought in I’ve been very upfront with them. I’ll ask, “You love the look of Military Orders?” Ok well, jump straight into N4 and be prepared to have your teeth kicked in for about a year and then learn you like Varuna. Not sure what you want to play and do t have time to drink from a fire hose? Buy C1 stuff. Figure it out slow. So far it’s been working well.
C1 makes little sense because of how compartmentalised the Infinity ruleset is, and therefore how useful it is to 'step up' the ruleset over a set of intro games. Here's how I currently do it: in the first game we use orders, dice mechanics, terrain, actions, rangebands + ZoC. In the second you use LT+LoL, deployables, camo and fireteams. In the final game you use command tokens, hacking, repeaters, specialists, and play a nice intro mission like supplies. Three games of C1 would leave you pretty clueless about N4. However, as many have pointed out, it makes huge sense in terms of bundling units and stocking stores. That's something I've seen and felt change, but not really thought about before. Seems spot on to me.
Not really, people will read it that way in C1, then get into N4 and get confused... if the official route gets followed, that is. Also, that was the most known contradiction, so I think there might be more... Specially with the ARO "errata" from the latest FAQ. I think there are two answers to this. First, it's the old "CB plays a game that has nothing to do with the competitive gamestyle of the community", which can't be verified, but has so many things pointing to that... The second is a little more "nefarious": how to sell a model that has taken as much time as others to be developed, but has an uninteresting profile? Sell it with "must have" models. This can be applied to less attractive profiles, or redundant models. And let's be honest, the desirability of the profile rarely, if ever, improves. As a business model, it has a certain "effectivity" to it, but I think it erodes the community's trust in the company. And yes, I know they can't release only "effective" profiles, but seriously, unless those profiles give something to the list as a whole (and I'm talking about something else besides "only profile that gives X in the whole faction", like the only Engineer or the only Melee unit, or the only infiltrator...). The main problem is that N4's complications come not for the amount of rules, but the interaction between those rules, and how critical is to learn by heart the Order Expenditure Sequence... which today is different between C1 and N4
Disagree as in our area C1 has taken Infintiy player count from 2 to 6 - if that is replicated in other areas it will prove significant in long run. They said if it doesnt sell they will not release new C1 products, yet now we have Crimson Stone... Nope, disagree 100%, been wargaming for decades and was always put off by Infinity due to time it would take to learn it when there are so many other solid and fun games out there as well (and no, i dont play GW ones). C1 made me sit up and look at Infinity again and have now had a few games and love it, I know that I will stick with C1 for a while longer but N4 is not factoring into my plans when i buy and paint models. Disagree with this, but only a little. I would put the ration at 30/70 Get new players/simplify stock for stores. 1 Reason for little chatter is newbies likely to use FB and local groups before Forums, another is C1 is a well written ruleset so a lot less questions need to be asked. The only negative I am seeing about C1 is actually some established players putting the game down making newbies feel they are either learning a pointless game or are just stupid not to go straight to N4 -and this is more in comments on FB threads and a few local gaming groups.
As it was explained when C1 was introduced, there are many players who like the format of the introductory rules but not progress further, making a game system in that format and allowing such players to keep playing with an expanded choice increases the consumer base and maybe help increase the player base of N4 in the long run. While yes, it means there are two systems, it is not to the detriment of N4 and the community overall can only benefit from this move.
My point wasn't to get people to bash C1 but to hopefully get C1 players to jump on and talk about the game. Regardless of the products intent, it's still a product meant to be a game with a community. I was just stating how the community "isn't there" and asking (mostly new players) why that is...
