Lol, people upset about 9 products being stopped production (and the same people holding a grudge about uprising) while the rules and armies remain playable pointing to GW as the gold standard for a hobby company. The cognitive dissonance is fucking reverberating in here. Don't get me wrong, GW is improving. I think they're doing good things. But if you're going to shit your pants about uprising and notified rotation of production, you've got to have some pretty selective memory about GW to have even the slightest positive emotion towards them.
My main reason for not playing 40K, AoS, or Kill Team, is because they're shit games and Infinity is far, far superior. Hence why I'm on this forum.
First time poster, but long time follower. There’s a lot of drama on here. Anyway I’m a PanO main and although I’m sad to see the decision made regarding Aconticemento and find it weird looking at the boxes being retired, I think CB has earned our trust. I know and agree that sometimes they do make questionable choices, like adding a glorified token to a Jannissary box or yet another Bolt to the Beyond box, but CB is still doing some really great stuff and honestly I’ve never had more fun playing and painting miniatures than since I left the burning wreckage that was my beloved WHFB, and joined the (mostly) more mature and sensible Infinity scene. And let’s all try and remember that even though we all see things ourselves very clearly - and obviously we’re all correct all the time and completely infallible, that others might have a different way of playing this wonderful game and that sometimes people choose less optimal unit loadouts or troops, because it fits a theme or chosen approach. CB is probably just trying to cater to everyone the best they can. Keep up the good spirit peeps :) I’ll crawl back into the shadows and lurk
Well said! In the Grand scheme of life, the little missteps could be the tiny signs of cataclysmic betrayal or just missteps that won't matter in 12 months time.
Could this just be a case of "we are not printing these at the moment because this new stuff is taking up our production slots". I mean, at some point, wouldn't CB just revisit these sectorials they are stopping runs on when they feel the time is appropriate to resume them again? (speaking of the sectorials that are not getting deleted from army builder of course)
That's exactly what is happening, from waht we know. 3 sectorials per faction seems to be the current limit of CB's production capacity, and less popular armies are the first to go for now. No sectorial was ever removed from the game, very few units were completely removed at all (Exrah, four units including a TAG), and JSA leaving YJ was the biggest shakeup we've seen.
Oh, I agree. But there's also no visible (and yes, I do know there might be some invisible ones) reasons for removing a whole army. Especially given that even relatively unpopular ones, like FRRM, still represent a significant number of players. Bottom line is that the crucial thing is balance, so armies have to stay supported by the rules and updated when big changes, like a new edition or HS-type expansions, arrive. So far CB's record for this is so-so. If officially acknowledging that things will be done on an extended schedule instead of all in one go will improve the balance and consistency, then I'm all for it.
I like how not jumping on the GW hate train equates to "GW as the gold standard for a hobby company"...talk about cognitive dissonance. We still haven't actually received an official rotation of production. It's only a leaked notification at this point, if you want to get technical. This is par for the course with CB. Something gets leaked and rather than address it head on...we get an article from them about Joan of Arc throughout the years. If ever there's an example of SKU bloat it's that we have two separate SKUs for her. Put it in a double blister and be done with it.
Maybe I was referring to other posts in the topic? I'm not sure if you're being intentionally blind or you read the following as something other than being very positive about GW and forgiving their past grievances. I don't quite understand what the metric of success is here? "better" communication? The intention for rotation is stated, and the timeframes haven't been long enough for us to see if they stick to it. Sure, you can assume they wont, but that doesn't then form a valid reason to criticise until a decent period of time has come to pass. The only data point is they intend to. To go back to a GW comparison, how long did some of their lines sit unupdated without any kind of communication? CB haven't even come close to that timeframe. Now I'm not suggesting we should have to wait that long, but if you can defend GW, I don't see why CB doesn't get given at least some of the same slack. Unless you're intentionally biassed based on very specific events which specifically affected you personally.
Then maybe instead of making a blanket statement you should have quoted that specific post. Crazy how otherwise it looks like you're just shitposting. Where is "the intention for rotation stated"? We haven't seen an official article from them regarding Shock Army. The Merovingian one also uses language like this: Spoiler That language doesn't guarantee there's any kind of a rotation. It's that the range is retired, indefinitely, giving them the option of bringing it back. Sorry for bolding so much stuff but the language is important here. CB also hasn't existed for as long as some of those lines have. GW's also currently doing regular check-ins with what they're working on for the Sisters of Battle and they're planning on them being the first "public beta tested" codex from their history. Why do you think the same thing can't apply to why you might defend CB but not GW? We're going on how many days now since the "leak" of Shock Army stuff being retired and still no actual wording from CB proper as to whether this is the same as Merovingia("indefinitely") or something new entirely...which goes to why I personally won't cut them an inch of slack on this topic. Wording matters and them using language like "indefinitely" or "consider relaunching the sectorial in the future" suggests they have no intention to do so and they're using language that to me in my experience with them suggests they want the discussion to go away. I know I'm seen as aggressively negative but I have my reasons. They're not simply for hating on CB or whatever. I like this game. I like this setting. I still treasure my signed 2E core book, which only got signed because of the fact that then-CB wanted to ensure that I felt I "got something that justified" the shipping costs. I want Infinity to succeed. I want CB to succeed.
I'm wary of deep-diving into the specific language of announcements given most of them are made by people who don't natively read/write english.
Another dude with a jammer? I wonder who else is going to get jammers then, seeing as they at least aren't ghazi-exclusive anymore since the Heckler. Hopefully they all don't go to Ghazi level of annoying to deal with. But on the other hand, the model looks cool. I like the pose, and the detail on the model, especially his arms. They went so far as to sculpt a vein on his forearm!
Ghazi has a perfect storm of abilities; Jammer with extremely high WIP for people trying to get past, Chain Rifle DTW for light infantry trying to deal with them, E/M DTW for heavy infantry or TAGs trying to deal with them, and smoke to make the most out of their impetuous movement. Heckler had one from this list of items, and at mediocre WIP. It looks like Heckler's utility was a combi and a FastPanda at a cost of 4x higher than Muttas, while to me it seems like Zulu Cobra will make a similar trade off where it sacrifices DTWs and low cost in order to gain marker state and probably a combi as well. So while a Camo or TO Camo Pan-O trooper for just shy of 30 points is going to be nasty for anyone trying to hunt Fusiliers, it's still going to be a whole lot more fair to deal with than 4 Muttas that a Haqq pays less for in total.
