New FAQ (11/4/2019)

The thing about Deadzone's cover rules is that it starts with the presumption "If you can see your target, it has cover" and you get bonuses in the relatively rarer situations that the target is completely out in the open. But I can't imagine playing Deadzone with hills or other ground based terrain covering up the grid system. There's a pretty big deliberate synergy that all of the associated building wall tiles for the game are 8" x 8" squares, or accessories for those 8x8 squares.

What I remember of Developer talk concerning Dust is that it was operating on a similar principle—you can probably see your target and there’s probably stuff in the way.

Honestly, I wouldn't fall down in shock if Defiance ends up with rules (either official or fan-written) to be played on a 1" grid. Hexes would be cute and all, but it's easier to approximate more accurate distance with quick rules like "Diagonals are 0.5 extra each, or 2.0 extra for 5" than to deal with being unable to align walls with grid edges.

 

You're right @psychoticstorm, some people will think, why bother with the physical product. But that thinking already exists now to a very large extent. Tabletop gaming isn't a massively popular industry compared to PC gaming. Tabletop will always be a niche industry because of the difficulty playing them and the entry requirements. Especially compared to the ease of some PC games.

This disdain towards using available technology to improve tabletop gaming is holding the industry back imo. Does anyone really think tabletop gaming is going to survive the future if it refuses to improve? PC games make tabletop gaming obsolete like some web companies make newspapers obsolete. Tabletop simulator is stealing potential and existing tabletop gamers already. It does this operating as a very crude product. What will happen when these PC options are more refined? As much as I enjoy painting mini's I'll make that switch when the time comes. The process of dealing with the rules and measurements helps make Infinity a very slow game to play. Too slow imo.

As a tabletop gamer I want to spend my time making decisions and taking actions. I don't want to decide if LoF exists on a cumbersome tabletop. I don't want to discuss if I can slice that pie. I don't want to do the math to find a to hit modifier. I want that information available to me right away so I can decide which trooper is going to move and complete objectives or engage the enemy. I want to discuss the awesome plays that were made during the game. Not lament mistakes made from incorrect rulings.

This type of hybrid game doesn't need to be profitable either. It just needs to be sustainable. If the only people to enjoy it are myself and my gaming group during my lifetime, I'll be happy. I'm interested in a more enjoyable experience. A hybrid with the right elements is exactly what I'm looking for. I don't want to play by the archaic standards of the tabletop industry if I don't have to.

How is the tabletop industry going to evolve if new ideas are met with such skepticism? Ideas and concepts typically improve over time with work and dedication. Many here don't even want to give them a chance. I think we should be embracing new ideas. If those ideas are executed poorly... then everyone is justified in calling the product trash.

So instead of sitting here saying it's too difficult to handle elevated terrain within an app or grid lines, maybe toss out ideas that can work. Then improve those ideas. Tiny RF transmitters could be used on each mini and smartphones could track their positions. Or all physical positions on the table, terrain included, could be wired underneath like old chessboards so you push down the start and end locations. Discussion should lead us to the best option, but we have to have these discussions first. I didn't even think of RF transmitters until speaking to an engineering friend of mine.

Something as simple as having the app do the math to figure out to hit and crit rolls is an improvement. Having a player do this manually isn't a worthwhile experience, it's a necessity. PC games don't force players to do this because they understand it's not fun for the average gamer. PCs can take this burden unto themselves, and so they do. When it comes to making this hybrid, identifying the right areas to remove from the player and those to leave is important. I don't think having an app roll the dice using a random number generator is a good idea.

 

Others are just as sympathetic as you, but they are perhaps instead sympathizing with the Luftschiffbau Zeppelin company.

 

It is a matter of perspective. You like the idea, I do not. Even if all the RF transmitters, smartphones and screen-tables were provided for me for free and fully configured, I wouldn't play it. Tabletop gaming is a very tactile hobby, and that is part of the draw for players. We already have access to complex grid-based computer games to simulate battle. (If you haven't seen the Steam game 'Fell Seal' check it out, it is my current favorite.) I play those video games and enjoy them. But they don't give me the same type of enjoyment as putting custom painted 32mm figures on a large table covered primarily with tiny buildings and scenery I built and painted myself.

Disdain for technology is not holding the industry back. Lack of interest is holding back heavy techno-integration. For many people the technologically blended experience will be nothing more but a very expensive gimmick, that would not add much value to the experience, and might actually devalue the experience.

If you and your group want to develop something, by all means! Go for it! I hope you have a blast. I just feel like you are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole.

(Also there is a very small and weird group of us that actually like doing math.)

 

I find these comments truly ironic because the same can be said of tabletop gaming. Projectors have been brought up before but it's not the way I'm leaning. I think the immersion gets broken as hands etc get in the way.

You've provided an example of an idea executed poorly. But they both had the idea of airborne transportation. An idea that was clearly worth pursuing. Maybe my attempt will be more successful.

To those who've given genuine feedback, potential pitfalls is feedback, thank you. To those who've simply said it's going to fail, I'd prefer you be silent.

 

Red text emphasis mine. I don't want to play computer games, I want to play games with tangible objects with my opponent sitting/standing/whatever at the same table. Yes, the barrier to entry to tabletop games might be higher than PC games. Yes, they certainly have a narrower appeal. I don't think that means they are obsoleted in any way by PC games, though, and I bet most of the people here aren't playing Infinity just because there's no PC game that quite scratches the gaming itch.

Good luck with your app-based stuff, I sincerely hope you succeed. I doubt I'll be a customer, however; I work on a computer all day five days a week, I don't really want computers getting in the way of friendly competition with other people outside that time.

 

I don't think this forum is really the place to push your not-Infinity game concept, and this thread is definitely not. Perhaps you could continue this discussion elsewhere (yes, I know I've responded a few times too).

 

If you have no interest in my style of tabletop game, you're welcome not to play it. But everything you've listed about what you enjoy from tabletop gaming still exists. You still have custom painted 32mm minis. You'll still have a large table covered with scenery you built yourself. The math is still there when deciding the course of action with the greatest odds for success. It's still a very tactile experience moving your troopers around and rolling dice.

Why are you telling me about all the people who won't be interested in this style of game? Do you think I don't know many people won't be interested? Many people aren't interested in tabletop gaming as a whole. I'm only interested in doing this right for those who are.

You tell me to go for it, but all you've said is you don't like the idea and you don't think it will work(round peg and all that).

 

I don't understand how you jump to this extreme or conclusion. What about my idea leads you to believe computers will get in your way? The goal is essentially to speed up play so you have more fun game play moments with your opponent.

Would having a google home device that does nothing but listen to your game and correct you on errors in the rules get in the way? If this was placed on a screen instead does it make a difference? What if you had one more opponent to play in your area because they enjoy this type of assistance?

You are so right, this was clearly not the place to have a healthy discussion. But you're wrong if you think I'm pushing my idea. Where have I told people they'd enjoy it more. I've spent time defending the idea itself which isn't the same.

I'm passionate about my idea. The topic came up and i wanted to share. I'd love to see it succeed. Who better to discuss it with than fellow tabletop gamers? I have a feeling I'd get more feedback from a more generic tabletop forum. A dedicated forum like this seems to breed people terrified of change.

Why do topics need to move elsewhere all the time? I've seen the trash discussed in those monthly threads. Or is it only suggested once certain people are bored with the topic?

 

Why, this is why;

I am giving you my opinion, that I feel your premise is flawed. I don't think RF transmitters, and table displays are a useful or needed evolution. Your post read like you are frustrated that us Luddites are holding you back from the glorious future, and I just don't think that big of a group is going to be interested in your version of the future. We have what we have now, not because we can't do more, but because we like what we have. Now for a more compact, prepackaged board game experience built from the ground up with those assumptions, there might be something interesting there.

As for constructive criticism on how to make the idea work, that will be hard for me, because I don't share the same vision as you, but I will try to be helpful.

Table; I still think a table-screen is a dead-end, for an infinity like game. You either do away with actual vertical heights, and deal with virtual representation of vertical structures, or you deal with your physical vertical terrain obscuring most of your table. Including your ZOC / Weapon range visuals. I still think a projector overlay would be more versatile to varied terrain settings. Although you still have the problem of shadows both of hands and also tall terrain.

LOS; I have seen laser chalk lines (a terrible name) used effectively to end LOS disagreements

RF tags: the best is if you can get some small enough to fit inside the base. (Do they make them that small, I don't even know) What might be nice is if the RF tag contains all the open information of a figure. That way your opponent doesn't have to ask you what a model does, or try and decipher your 'friendly list' they just point their RF reading device at the figure, and boom all the stats! Would really open up proxy options as well, because their would be no excuse about being confused about which figure is which.

LED; configurable LED lights built into the base, might be a neat alternative to tabletop markers. (Red ring of death = unconcious!, Yellow light = targeted state, Green light = link leader, cycling rainbow lights = disco state.)

MP3 player; because using my mouth to go "pew pew" doesn't impress my wife at all.

 

I'm confused. Isn't this topic supposed to be the New FAQ?

 

That's old news

 

Give it time.

 

It is. FAQs change the way the rules work. People are just discussing other directions the rules could have gone, and comparing/contrasting it with other games.

 

Looking at screens definitely gets in the way of personal interaction for me. Do you enjoy it when someone you're eating with keeps looking at his phone, regardless of the reason? I don't like having to look up Infinity rules on my phone, I definitely don't want to be tied to a screen in order to play a tabletop game.

Yes, a generic tabletop forum would be more useful to you. This forum is for discussing Infinity, which your game idea is not. I don't think your loaded language ("terrified of change" is not something anyone wants to be called, true or not) is helping, whether you're loading it on purpose or not. I suggested moving it elsewhere because the discussion seemed to have become circular and had now consumed a thread ostensibly about the new FAQ. Perhaps you're right about being tired of the topic as well.

 

The thing is that there are boundary concerns that amount to “Don’t try to tell people how to play your game, or force them to play the game your way. Let them do it how they want to.”

Loading an army list onto a tablet is pretty convenient until you need to show someone else the information. And it’s pretty convenient if you agree with how the developer is presenting the information. MayaNet and WarRoom 2 are pretty awesome for their games. BadThingsHappen (for Malifaux) has some bad choices in its implementation, and I still only use Army’s mobile version in emergencies. (There are some unofficial Malifaux applications that are basically just PDF generators that some people prefer to the app.). If playing the game absolutely depended on those apps...

On the other side of things, suppose you’re playing an RFID based game. You want to proxy another model, where are you getting the RFID tag, and how does it get coded?

That hobbyist “I want to play this game my way, and I will build a table to do it if I have to” attitude extends to things like writing software, writing up reference sheets, designing markers, and all sorts of things. And that means that if you try to hide mechanics in propetary software (like the last fantasy game I remember tried to do), that’s going to stand in people’s way.

And it’s the crazy “I like this game. I’m going to personalize it for me and show it to other people” hobbyist attitude which is what keeps things going. Without that, you’re just selling people an expensive and awkward video game and peripherals.

 

So, how about we start on a new thread?

 

Someone looking at their phone doesn't help them with eating their meal. Looking at a device during a game of Infinity to look up rules is a help. No one says you must look at a screen either. You can still use measuring tapes or open the rule book. But your opponent may want to get range data or LoF info directly answered on their phone.

You're right, I'm not discussing Infinity, but I am discussing alternate ways to play Infinity. Ways that some might find more enjoyable.

I do use loaded language on purpose because I think it's appropriate. It paints a clear picture of what is happening and is mild in comparison to the sheer volume of hostility to an idea. Your response here is the kind of bias I regularly see on these forums. You talk about my language but where were you when others are making wild accusations about someone "demanding" or saying they "sound like an ass". You've instead brought this up against someone who's idea you don't like.

Why this topic, in this thread? What about all those monthly threads in this same section? Are all of those off topic discussions really related to new releases? What's your reasoning?

If you really want to stop these topics getting out of hand, why not try moderating? What purpose do all the posts saying it won't work serve? The responses to them and the arguments would disappear too.

I'm not sure what to make of your post. Are you claiming I'm telling others how to play their game? I have a lot more questions but I'll start with that one.

 

Almost relevant:

 

Why are you stuck on how much others will be interested in it? To be fair you're not the only one. It's a way to improve the game for me and my friends. If i was planning to make a business and sell this I wouldn't be discussing it here.

So why do you and others feel the need to tell me it won't work for other people. People I'm not making this for.

If you like what you have now for Infinity, how does my idea threaten this? You play your way, and I'll play mine. Help me make my vision or work, or don't. But this need to put it down helps no one. If I succeed, you or others might even change your mind. You don't know how it's going to turn out. You think you know is all.

I do appreciate the attempt at feedback even though you're not interested.

Table:
I agree with you about the PC screen surface. I don't see how I can make that work on elevated surfaces at this time. I want to avoid any direct input into an app regarding trooper positions once the game has started. A combination of screen and RF possibly, it all depends on how much i enjoy the idea of visuals on the playing surface. One thing no one has mentioned is the ability to set different backgrounds on screen. That will provide more variety compared to most peoples mats or tables.

RF Tags:
These can easily fit on minis. I hadn't considered having one for each mini in my collection. I was thinking about just assigning each trooper from my Army list to specific tags each game.

LED:
I like this idea if done subtly. I could paint and surface acrylic bases so only a small portion is showing. I do hate moving markers along with minis. My biggest concern is that the lights will never account for all game states. And if i have to choose between some lights and some markers, or all of one, I'd choose all of one. I'd need a completely dynamic indicator that i can program all possible states into. There are some very cool transparent surfaces that do just that being released, but it's too early to expect these in the size i'd require. But this idea has potential.

Sound:
I don't want to go near this idea. It may be appropriate somewhere, but i don't see it just yet.