September>December 2024: Nuclear winter has struck, leaving room for the N5

As long as that guide is present as suggestions, but not “strict guidelines”. And also present examples of current proxied armies that are not about those that have been phased out as a sectorial, I am ok with it.

Again, I am in love with @RobertShepherd o-12 retro-futuristic looks, and from memory about half the models are not even 0-12 ones. That is a perfect example of why going by “aesthetics” and feelings of “this look as a …” are the actual guideline for a good proxy

 

the question should not be asked

An official proxy guide will not solve the problem "we cant play the army we want"

 

Back in N3, i was playing vanilla haqq and was using the touareg sniper as Zhayedan sniper and a khawarig rifle as touareg doctor. In 2 of the 4 rounds players asked the TO to penalize me because "it was confusing and the proxying was done in bad faith". People are special...

And yes, is a bit of cherry picked example with scyla, BUT, nothing in the rules prevent ti do it and not all players convert/paint the figures to put the correct weapon in the figures. (This profile makes FT core, but only 1 figure existed. I'll convert 4 of them? No, I'll line up 5 identical figures and you have to remember the loadout of each one)

 

Well, people may be "special" but we don't really care, right? The rules of the game very widely authorize proxying, period. If a "special person" doesn't like the rules, it's his/her issue, not the issue of the dude who is proxying.[/QUOTE]

 

The proxy guide that exists regarding ITS should work well enough. If I remember correctly it states that as long as the weapon loadout and Silhouette of the mini match the profile then you can use it. Oh and that they’re official CB minis. Making this an official thing in the living guide may be useful.

This however is the problem people seem to be having. My player group have been quite vocal on this. It’s not that the minis are unusable it’s that the armies they come from are no longer able to be played (as far as we currently know, hopefully they’ll make a comeback).

I have myself used my minis to proxy for some profiles (agreeing here with @Child9 and @Rabble that as long as they’re painted and look correct it’s all good) and there’s been no issue from our player group. The problem that has currently appeared is the removal of profiles and armies that let people play the game a particular way. I have noted ad nauseam in the support the Squalo Mk.1 thread that it isn’t the disappearance of models I necessarily decry, it’s the removal of profiles especially useful ones and in this case; armies like Varuna and NCA.

Proxying is fine. Especially in this game and as long as you make your opponent aware of what is being proxied and where and as long as it’s done in line with what the profiles have in terms of armaments and silhouette. Not having the profiles to play your army the way you have for years… is where all the salt mines lie.

I know a few of our player group who have vehemently declared that they won’t be playing the new edition and one who has decided to remove himself from the game entirely. In his words “I don’t want to play as there’s no way to know if CB won’t do to the current sectorials what they’ve just done to others”. Trying to placate him with the ability to proxy won’t work as his army is (to his mind at least) gone.

Hopefully when the new edition drops we’ll be able to see exactly where we stand and perhaps the armies that have disappeared will receive new life down the road. I believe there was a mention of PDF files for the armies that have been removed. If so I can hopefully persuade some to return as extrapolating into N5 shouldn’t be too difficult.

Guess we’ll have to wait and see. November is going to be a busy month for my waits to be over…

 

Yesterday i built the new scenery. Lovely. No instructions needed and pretty sturdy. And the expansion pack will be awesome (i got the instructions for that pack and not the basic one)

 

I for one think it would be quite helpful, especially for players who play occasionally and don't follow the game. Not seeing your army where you expected it on Army would be pretty disorienting, so having a clean guide to quickly make up a fair force from what you have would be nice.

 

I know this is fewer in Infinity than say a GW army, but there are some people that that only had figures for a specific sectoral like Acon, NCA, StarCo, etc. By those being taken away rather than re-made, it feels like when GW would make whole armies unplayable. This happened to me and why I no longer play. CB is telling them they can no longer play what they have spent time and money on and to do it all over again on a force they might be what they want or like. There's a reason they only had what they had. CB is going to loose players due to this. They just hope the gain is more than the loss. It's a business decision that may or may not work. Time will tell if they become more successful or they go the way of Warma/Hordes. A game that was huge for a while but then rule changes made them a game where people can't get rid of what they have now.

 

Yes, however, if they only had minis for Acontecimento, NCA, Starco etc then not all those units have gone away most of them will still exist in other sectorials of the same army.

The Army might be unplayable as a specific Sectoral in N5 (though this remains to be seen as far as the PDFs of N4 armies go) but the miniatures are still usable either with their profiles in other sectorials or as proxies for new units.

Nobody and I mean NOBODY is going to or can stop you using your assembled and painted Infinity minis. If you need directions on what minis can proxy for what then maybe some enterprising Warcors can sort that for you.

What's not going to happen is someone coming round to your house to smash your Infinity minis becuse their profiles no longer exist in N5.

 

again, having the profiles available in Vanilla or using all the figures as proxies of other troops will not bring the same feeling that playing YOUR army you collected all this time.

Yes, i can play vanilla Ariadna with only french, but i dont have AVA 4 Chasseurs, i dont have the nagas or Scylla from my Acontecimento army in Vanilla PanO, and so on, and so on...

Please stop pretending proxying is the solution

 

All true. But also cold comfort. It's also easier said than done. I sympathize because I went through this a bit with Uprising. I had a bunch of JSA figures I could no longer use because I didn't have the money to get into JSA. I went from having 1 Factions to having 1.25, but that .25 was unplayable. Sure Acon players can play some vanilla. Some. They are going to need to buy more if they want to be effective though. Sure they can proxy, but some JUST DON'T LIKE TO PROXY. That may not make sense to some but it is perfect sense to others. I don't like to proxy. I only do it if i must. Like forgot a figure sitting on my painting table, or I want to try a profile that's not out yet. But for me that's one figure, maybe two. I will not proxy whole armies. It's not fun to play and it sucks to play against as well. I hate over and over again asking what something is before I do an action.

Edit: actually I'm a liar. I forgot about my Ikari, which I have not played in a very long time, that I proxy a lot with old figures. But I try to keep them as close as possible to what the troops is. 1st edition Zhanshi for Keisotsu for example. It was through playing this though is how I learned I didn't like large amounts of proxying.

 

It is not the solution.

It is a solution.

Where is a will, there is a way. Thus, in reverse: if there is no will, then no way will be sufficent.

Someone may have their army kept in the game, but still consider that with the change of edition, and remake of the army by the comapny, it has "lost the feel", and thus they don't want to play it. Speaking from a personal experience here.

 

At this point, cold comfort is be the only comfort available. CB has made what they believe is the best decision for their game and their company. All that remains is for players to make their decision. Going on ad nauseam and ad infinitum about how it’s mean and wicked and evil and unfair and and and and is pointless. Chose from the options you have.

And a ‘recommended’ proxy list outside of the suggestions in ITS would likely simply invite a new wave of complaints as individual players nitpick the recommendations. We have guidelines for proxying, either use them or don’t.

 

My main issue with how they've handled the cut sectorials, aside from the actual cutting, is how it has been communicated. There has been mention of pdfs, but I haven't seen any confirmation of that or what it will really mean. CB also said the sectorial list they have shown would be the armies available at launch. What they haven't done is clarify their ultimate status. Does "available at launch" mean the cut sectorials might come later, like with N4, or was it simply a case of semantics and the armies that are missing from that list are permanently gone? Will they be put on a pdf with no updates or balancing? If they are put on a pdf, would they be ITS legal? Clarity on all of this, I think, would go a long way to calming people down.

 

Communication has never been a Corvus Belli forte.

 

CBs thing has always been to under promise then over deliver.

While more information would be useful the absolute worst thing you can do as a company is promise to do stuff then not do it, even for understandable and valid reasons. People will just rake you over the coals for that.

 

You, gentlemen, are both right.

 

I remember "Year of the Tohaa" promise, they so over delivered on that one, I still fondly remember it as one of CBs best over deliveries ever.