Okay, I played ~10 games with RF. I don't bother much about commlink (could be better but ok), about mandatory or not dropping, about 50-75-100 threshold and low impact of RFs. The worst part is you usually need 2-3-5 pts MORE to fit great RF team. Outrageous! We need 5-10% discount on RF units :D
250+100 standard is fine cause it shakes up the 300 point list build. I'll throw in on comlog. It's not great currently. More profiles are the answer I think. Make the price of it scale with the resiliency of the unit. Maybe change the point threshold to something like 100 points for first turn and 75 points for second. I don't think it should be 50 though. Clarification on how the droppod works. What is it, terrain or token? Do I place it and measure from it or can I futz around with it. Keep it all simple. Lots of complicated solutions are bring flung around but the entire reinforcements rule set is one of the simpler Infinity scenarios. edit: reinforcements should be private info.
Hey all, while I am still settling on my ideas for Reinforcements ( I do like the reducing of commlink profile cost as well as maybe reducing the reinforcement trigger, maybe 75 points?), I do have some ideas from a user who doesn’t have access to the forums! They go by Four/WilhelmIV and they are pretty active on the IGL and the global Infinity discord server. They had a lot of thoughts about reinforcements, so I volunteered to be their mouthpiece. Buckle up and prepare yourselves for a long post: Reinforcements: I have just under a dozen reinforcement games and these are my opinions on the game mode thus far, and how I feel about their consequences. I wanted to give CB some feedback after discussing the metagame extensively with Lobo over discord on IGL. The armies that I have played so far, is 2 games on Tunguska, 6 games on Shaasvastii, 1 game on NCA, and one game on O-12. Factions I have played games against are ISS, SP, Starmada, Van Aleph, Van Haqqislam, OSS, and Van Yu-Jing. Thoughts on the generic metagame of reinforcements: Currently, with the 100 points of losses being required, the metagame of reinforcements leans heavily onto the player who drops their reinforcements second generally winning with few exceptions. 8/9 games were determined by the player dropping second and killing the enemy reinforcements, doing the objective, and then proceeding to win. Not dropping is usually too large of a detriment to wait, as losing 100 points means either losing the majority of your filler, or most of your relevant swc picks. Is this good for the game?: I think the consequence of going from 50 points to 100 points is that instead of alpha strike being reduced in power, there is definitely “haves” and “have-nots” in the ability to attack and defend now. I feel that considering dropping second is so favored, that the points threshold might have been more interesting at 50 points. This is due to the weakening of alpha strike through other means. Overall, I like this format, but it needs work. Who benefits(out of the factions I understand well enough in relation to their meta): Pan-O(all) SP OSS ForCo Vanillia Yujing Losers: ISS Vanillia Nomads Vanillia CA Tunguska Corregidor Neutral: Shasvastii(Maybe slightly losing) Haqq(Maybe slightly losing) Starmada(Better in most matchups, worse in key matchups) Factions I have non-finalized verdicts on due to lack of reinforcement experience, but extrapolating based on past playtime and other faction considerations: Tohaa(winning) Ariadna(Neutral) Bakunin(Winning) Invincible Army( winning) Ramah(Winning) Things that are good about reinforcements: Generally, the game speed is faster while the pace of the game is also much more methodical. Taking fights is sometimes not correct and playing avoidance is more common. More objective based gameplay Stronger sectorials(an aro reducing 1/10th of your orders is much much better than it used to be) Nerfs to Vanillia Nomads and Combined army indirectly via swc hits. You can't take everything. Less group 2 shooting into g1 10 orders attacking. Visor is more important (due to the power of mim-6 units and the decrease in the ability of defensive hacking to spotlight into killing a model once it is the active turn again). Guided Missile Launcher nerf due to it becoming increasingly inefficient to launch a pitcher, spotlight, then fire guided, averaging from 3-6 orders with a median of 4.5. I overall like the additional swc added to factions from comms. Cons: “Haves” and “Have-nots” Comms balancing Steel Phalanx Roadbots Tohaa Units should cost different amounts in reinforcements: Hackers Comms: I think comms models should have more varying swc costs, while I think it is great for the top end factions to take this nerf, some of lower end factions were pretty drastically affected and may need some adjustments. I would remove the swc cost from the tunguska, corregidor, and Shaasvasti. I will admit some level of bias in this case but it does tunnel list building in a notable way. I think generally comms models being somewhat restrictive in the amount available is largely a good thing due to the way it pushes fireteams. Right now theres definitely a big gap between which factions can and can not remove 100 points of their opponents army or do not have enough defense. It feels like Steel Phalanx is the faction to beat due to their main counter, guided, being much more of an high risk investment. They generally do not have religious troops and also have the frenzy discount to push them into exceptional efficiency. Phoenix should probably take a hit of a couple of points. 20-30 point and upward skirmishers feel relatively worse due to the extra wounds and reduction of light infantry and filler models in list due to the compression of slots into a group one, with the exception of god king jaan star. Beast hunters are exceptionally efficient now, even more-so then before due to it being reasonable to trade them in and their low points count making it hard to reach the reinforcements threshold. However, skirmishers are also made generally worse because spending orders shooting/ pressing buttons with a skirmisher rather than activating a fireteam to shoot/ press button due to fireteam efficiency being more important than ever due to the limited order pool. Phoenix should probably not be 35 points in reinfor especially without a skill like religious on his profile. Similar note with a unit like Atalanta. It's quite egregious at the moment. Haves and haves not: Some factions have really oppressive order totals(Starmada, SP, IA, Van Yujing). For example in Starmada units like the roadbot+oko duo and and the zeta are very efficient order generators while being very mobile. Plus not losing as much in tools due strong native dz defense. Tacaware on fo bots: I think some units such as the fto mdrone should keep tac aware, as well as the tunguska fto tac aware, and RTF's tac aware, the rest should probably go. Hacking: With the nerf to guided, some factions will likely struggle. The aforementioned TJC and CJC are notable examples due to other swc taxes native to their factions (Szally being 2 swc, aguacil, etc). Units like Su-Jians, Knight of Montessa, etc are more likely to thrive, as units that stop this gameplan, such as morans, have a larger swc tax on the swc total. Some factions should not be changed, and it varies heavily case by case. BJC is probably fine due to their costs. Chain of Command: CoC is less notable than expected since most factions that wanted CoC probably had it already, or have good decoys in their fireteam. With the exception of the Marut. Hacking is still somewhat useful due to the interaction between isolation via hacking loss of lieutenant, and reinforcements (Isolation is not a null state so does not help drop reinforcements, which could prevent CoC reinf units from stopping LoL). The NCA problem: Putting swc into units that can’t attack and defend is very rough. Taking a hacker can be a big detriment due to the lacking offensive applications. Taking a TR bot and a hacker instead is generally worth losing an MSR, HMG, or a tag at the moment. Melee Reinforcements: Are quite nice to have and I wish CA got some. Tacaware reinforcements: I think every faction should be able to do a more elite 3 model group with at least 6 orders baseline or a wider reinfor group. I think this adds a lot to the game. Things to observe: I would watch the performance of factions like Haqqislam and Shaasvasti, they may be quite weak right now due to their weaker general shooting, as well as their faction structure changing a lot. Additionally the weakening of impersonators due to the generally more elite nature of the meta and skirmishers also being worse. Shaasvastii has been notably harder to play in my opinion post update due to less order filler models without templates. Additionally, killing 1-2 models per attacker and then losing two attackers feels aggressively bad for these factions due to the fragility of some core pieces. Tags as attackers: With less dz network coverage between less rems on the table, the risk of tag alpha strikes are high. Even the tags that lack mobility skills are good as they can reasonably attack a deployment and then escape. What I would adjust in the mean time from the factions I've seen and feel comfortable talking about: 4 points on Phoenix, currently out of line with Pan-O, increasing the points on hippolyta and eurodos may be appropriate as well Nox, comms, shaas goes to 0 swc Same change for Tunguska(or szally losing .5 swc in tunguska only) and Corgi. I would put more TJC changes in, but I just think tung are in a weird spot largely prior to reinforcements and continuing into it due to some costing issues. Brigada drop points or aguacil lt becoming .5 swc Rework seed soldiers to allow them to choose to use chest mines, or to become formed and fire a panzerfaust on aro. Kosmoflot comms from +2 to +1 (kosmo was already very ahead of other Ariadna factions and I doubt that changes much.
At some time it has to be said that Reinforcements, regardless of their implementation, will not (and, indeed, should not) be able to compensate for a big difference between two player's skill (or luck, "it's not the list, it's you"). As it is, if Player 1 goes for an alpha to the hilt, there is no reason to avoid reaching the retreat threshold, and so the reinforcements will arrive to "save" from 0 to 150pts on the table. 150 is ok, 0 is just prolonging the torture. If reinforcements always arrive at turn 2 regardless of situation, the Player one must make such an alpha strike that Player 2 is not on retreat on their first turn, and then can get loose on turn 2, making it so a more stable situation is at hand, because Player 2 will have nearly 90pts for their first turn, and at least 100 or so for the second, so they can do something other than be crushed on turn 1, then call reinforcements, and simply try to counteralpha just to call enemy reinforcements at best. On the other hand, if both players are of similar skill, then by forcing Reinforcements to show up on turn 2, we neutralize the lack of reaction options from Player 1 at turn 3 player 2 reinforcements in control zones ITS scenarios, and the Reinforcements can do something instead of just dropping to close the game (making it last longer without much real enjoyment). Another option could be to, while keeping the "turn 2 forced deployment", make it so if the player 2 suffers X amount of casualties they get deployed in their first turn, but this brings back to the table the problem of alpha strikers just hitting as hard as possible because they won't fear not having a second turn due to Retreat (and I've either won or messed more than an opponent's victory chances at a tournament by playing the mission while in Retreat, turning a defeat into a phyrric victory, even, or chipping away so much difference, they went from total victory to small victory) The game is already random enough to make Reinforcements a random event tha may happen on turn one or three for either player. I've seen ARM rolls of 95% literally get a 1 and lose the troop, BS rolls at 2 get a Crit, roll three crits in three consecutive AROs between the same pieces, etc... Far as I can think of, the only reason to hold your reinforcements would be to force a Retreat state and finish the game without letting the opponent to play more turns, maybe scoring one or two points because of command tokens and Courage/Religious troop. On the other hand, some Reinforcements come with Guided troops, making it so you can spend a turn ARO-marking and then the second start raining missiles (usually 4-6 orders here). Also, Eclipse smoke (and Tohaa's Mirrorball) have become the new META for non-kill'em-all scenarios, allowing safe passage till the objective and back (favouring those sectorials able to link an Eclipse provider with a Specialist, or those specialists that cover both roles, specially in Steel Phalanx with Machaon, Eudoros, and the CoC Myrmidon Officer). On the other hand, if she's not the Lt and we send her to be dropped to Unconscious (either level), then just losing another troop forces Reinforcements, and then we can repair her... Very random (because it may work, or the Marut may be killed for good). Funny thing, Phoenix cost 35pts atm, the same he costed nearly 10 years ago at release, and he was nerfed into overcost (39-41pts, can't remember) because of forum complains. This did nothing to remove him from the table, because he's the only linkable long range 1+NWI myrmidon (in fact, all other options for long range weapons are unlinked Agema, a new Haris of Makhai with or without Teucer, a spitfire Myrm, Light Rocket Launcher thorakitai/Thrasimedes, or Feuerbach thorakitai. Which are not prefered options because of survivability -only Teucer has NWI-, low BS, lack of Mimetism, or merely that the SP lists are not about holding a position but to assault). Hyppolita is ok as she is, you see her in O12 because she is the only Eclipse Smoke provider the whole faction has, and if deployed in Aleph it's because of her Breaker weapons, mostly. Eudoros I agree was overbuffed (for no reason, even... Avatar Lt2 2.0?) and that second wound with the change to STRucture is not good (also not something mere points adjustments can compensate). While I think he can keep having STR, he should be back in 1+NWI frankly, specially since atm he is even more interesting piece than Achiless, because while he outputs less damage both in melee and BS, he can survive much much more and better (he's not a HI, he can be topped by an engineer, carries Eclipse smoke, etc...)
@Koni I have made a separate thread for feedback on NA2 as it is likely to get filled with discussion for individual fixes for individual sectorials. I don't think it's much of a secret that most people feel like NA2's one size fits all approach to reinforcements wasn't appropriate and left people with a sour feeling about the whole game mechanic.
After playing a few more games, I think I've come to the conclusion (as have many others) that dropping reinforcements should be mandatory once you hit the point lost threshold. I also think that CB could have been, and maybe going forward should be more willing to give out unique and interesting tools in Reinforcements. I understand why they might be somewhat conservative initially in terms of giving tools like smoke, marker state access, and so on. You don't wanna introduce too much crazy stuff at once, and muddle feedback of the mechanic as a whole. But I think the most interesting reinforcements units are the somewhat non-standard stuff like the TAGs or the Mirrorball Igao, and the most interesting roster overall is the YJ reinforcements because they have some cool and somewhat unique tools (in the context of reinforcements) like pitchers and even their own little self contained guided set up. Going forward, I wanna see stuff like reinforcement bikes, neuro/total reaction units, smoke and so on. Also, just a few Haqqislam specific complaints, as I now feel I have a decent appreciation for their reinforcements roster: - Hafzas really lack a good role in the roster - cheaper orders and link filler can be provided by the much more useful Rafiq and Korsan. You can use them to form a five man pure core Sekban link, but that link is pretty bad vs the more flexible 4 and impure 5 man options - I'd try it if you could include a Burtuk, but it's too expensive. I guess you can try and holomask it as something like a Burtuk or Hawwa hacker to try and spook your opponent, but the limited SWC and points reinforcements sections are working with limits the opportunity for deception. Something like a CoC profile, Tac-Aware profile, or maybe something weirder that would allow for more interesting plays with holomask like MSV or Albedo would give them more of a reason to exist in reinforcements. - Vanilla Haqq was given access to two haris teams to use with their reinforcements. However, it's impossible to actually build a reinforcements section that can field two haris teams, at least in the recommended 250 pts/5 SWC+100 pts/2 SWC format. You either run out of points or SWC. Idk how to fix this really without reworking something major lol. I guess maybe some kind of ultra cheap link filler SMG Hafza/Sekban profile would do it? - The Reinforcement Hakim profiles with the Nasmat A2 are very unessential. I get that they pay an extra point for Terrain (Total) vs an FTO Hakim+Nasmat, but that is very very rarely worth it.
Since the Commlink Unit is just a tax that affects both players at listbuilding, but has absolutely zero impact to the game itself, our loocal group just decited to play without the need of a Commlink unit. We just say that we want to play with the Reinforcements rules and both write a 250+100 points list. No commlink needed.
The commlink should only serve to increase the limit of 15 playable units; not a mandatory tool to play reinforcements. We all agree on this. I wonder why nothing has changed yet, does this topic make sense?
You better want Corvus Belli to take their time. Let the community get used to the new mode. Let the players play with it, get familiar with it, test things out. Then get feedback again to see which complaints were born out of pain getting used to the new rules and which complains have stood the test of time. Short sighted reactions do not help. I would expect months to pass before we get an update that change bigger things.
My personal hope is that we will see some updates, and maybe a more comprehensive balance pass with the new ITS season.
I would like reasonably quick feedback on unintentional effects (like player 1 turn 1 reinforcements by taking a 250 list, or player 2 turn 3 reinforcements for unfun uncounterable plays) and unclear rules (size and permanency of the drop pod marker?). In a few months, I'd like feedback on the whole commslink trooper issue, and how the rule will work in the next ITS season (More options? Are 250+100 expected to be balanced against 300?) Over the next year(s), I hope CB uses the opportunity to release minifactions that can be slotted in as reinforcements for those factions that don't have them, similar to the Daebak or the Exrah forces (which I rather like - it's a good way to explore the universe without having to build a whole new army).
That doesn't need anything from CB. If your opponent voluntarily takes a 100-point handicap for some reason, just win the game. Infinity has never needed a rule prohibiting players from playing bad strategies. Also doesn't need a CB reply. The design intention of Reinforcements is clearly that P2 will sometimes drop their Reinforcements at the bottom of T3. Agreed. They've answered the most basic questions quite quickly (optional drops, open info), but some questions remain which I hope will be answered soon. Drop pod size is definitely one of them.
Forgot this one. It also doesn't need a reply. The rules are already clear that you must take a reinforcements group in an event with the Reinforcements extra. There's no scenario where a 250+100 list plays against a 300 list.
Nothing has changed yet because the rules are literally only a couple of weeks old and who is the ‘we’ from “we all agree”? It’s far too early still to make a large change based on what are still knee jerk reactions.
I haven't played as many reinforcements games as some people in this thread, but wanted to note a couple of things that have stood out to me from my games so far and preparing for running events with the new rules. Commlink profiles The implementation of the commlink rule is good, but commlink profiles have been an issue in terms of player experience. This is because: there is zero choice about whether to include a commlink (the inclusion of exactly one commlink is mandatory); there is zero choice for most/all armies in terms of selecting a commlink (either because there is only one available profile, or no significant difference between a couple of essentially identical profiles); and the commlink profiles are 20+ point, 0.5 SWC rifle-armed line troopers, i.e. not attractive profiles for their points cost in a vacuum. This means that choosing a commlink to add to your list has the same emotional resonance as paying your electricity bill. This is a problem because it means that when building a reinforcements list, the very first thing you do is not fun. This can't have been the design goal - selecting a commlink should be an interesting and compelling choice. There are a number of ways this could be addressed, but I would suggest considering: significantly reducing the cost of commlinks adding more commlink options to all armies, immediately and over time. There are a lot of troop choices that would become more interesting with a commlink option. Hafza, for example! Not compatible with regular play A major missed opportunity is that Reinforcements aren't compatible with regular play. If two players turn up to a game night at a local game store and one has a reinforcements list they want to play and the other has a regular list, they cannot play a game. (Before anyone interjects here and says "they totally can, they can just wing it", that isn't the point. Players, especially players who don't necessarily know each other well, will play the game according to the format and rules put forward by the company. What Corvus Belli officially suggests and supports is going to be experience most people have.) Not being compatible with regular play represents a big missed opportunity. An event format where reinforcements are optional on a list-by-list basis but not mandatory would be very welcome and have potential to become a 'new normal' format, if it can be more-or-less balanced. The idea of turning up to an event with, for example, one 300pt list and one 250+100pt reinforcements list is really interesting, if the two could be made to play against one another within reasonable tolerances. Right now, everyone is playing reinforcements vs reinforcements because it's the new thing to experiment with, but cross-play is something that would be great to see included as an option in the upcoming ITS season.
Oh, and; Reinforcements are open information This is something I was disappointed on at release but have mellowed on after time playing with the rules, but I still generally think is a missed opportunity. One of the casualties of the N4 15-trooper limit is that hidden information has become a much less important part of the game, since it's very easy to either confirm or deny the possibility of a hidden trooper in your opponent's list. If Reinforcements were private information until deployed, it would introduce some fuzziness back into the game that would mean I can't guarantee that my opponent doesn't have a Noctifier / Nadhir / Van Zant / etc until the reinforcements actually arrive. However, I appreciate that there are probably challenges here in terms of how Army presents the information, and potentially in the player experience (especially for newer players or people learning the format generally - adding so much potential hidden information to each game could be very difficult to come ton grips with in-game if you didn't know that certain profiles exist until they arrive on the battlefield and attack. The Azrai'l shotgun comes to mind.).
Just a small comment "Reinf" versions of profiles that lose or gain skills vs their vanilla counterparts, should follow consistent rules for it to make it easy to keep track of what these units do. We mostly see that in the existing rules. IE, all the skirmishers lost the same 'type' of rules - infiltrate, minelayer, marker - related to sneaking carefully into position, and that makes sense given they came crashing to earth in an orbital drop pod moments before! But Margot for example, became stealthier compared to her regular profile. But her regular profile is the one who lands nearby and sneaks to the battlefield. As Reinf models are added, keeping tabs on all the models that 'are' other models but different will become really difficult. Edit: Saw a few of my comments already ITT so why repeat them
As a small injection to Robert Shepherds points up there: The high price, and the awkward/bad profiles it is on, of the mandatory commslink is completely justifiable if that's what's been play tested to be compatible with a Reinf-50pts regular list.
I would like to remind that all feedback is valid and so is revisiting your feedback with more games/ experience under your belt, even if it remains the same.
