Is the game getting too complex?

I think that Infinity has too large a number of special rules. Explaining any one or two rules to a player who doesn't know them isn't hard, but the sheer volume of rules is hard for new players to keep up with. I think Infinity has a really solid core, but the way CB does expansions encourages them to keep adding new things even when they don't strictly improve the game.

 

Exactly. People will decide if the investment required is worth it to them, be it in money for minis, time for painting and learning the rules. Each person’s most nuestra will be different. All we can do is present the basics and the things that attract us in the best way possible, and let others do their own cost/benefit analysis.

 

I agree there are a ton of special rules, but the ones that come up in any particular battle are pretty discrete. I mean, symbiont armor is a complex special rule, but if you aren't facing Tohaa, not terribly relevant to know. If you don't enter melee, that whole system doesn't matter.

I think it is valuable to separate two issues for new players, broadly some form of "I don't know which of my options here is better" or alternativly "oh no, how does this new thing work?"

The first question is an experience thing, and very hard to predict/teach because Infinity is such a situation specific game. I like to handle those questions after the game when we discuss the outcome. The second question, how does this work, is usually best handled by an experienced player not in the game giving a quick explanation of the rule in question. That avoids feeling like your opponent is taking advantage of you in the game.

Of course, if your group is cool and relaxed about learning games, all this doesn't matter too much because both players should be talking about what they are doing and why. When I play someone new or a new list that my group hasn't seen before, I try to really spell out my declarations and reasoning (let's avoid the play by intent discussion for now) so they know what rules are in effect for each order.

 

Personally when I started to play, I found the number of Skills/Rules (and levels thereof) to be daunting.

It's not like you can flip to page 73 of the Nomads codex and see the unit entry for Hellcats and see the stats/weapon stats/rules. Sure, you can print your list out and get per unit statlines, but weapons print in a seperate chart, hacking in another, and skills you have to look up on the wiki. Army doesn't even have the option to include the rules in the list (or weapons with the unit profile)

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

For what it's worth, that's not what was being said. People were pointing out that forming a Fireteam: Duo has requirements in addition to having the Special Skill. Not that the troopers don't have the Skill, but that they can't use it.

 

40K is not a casual game. I friggin’ hate 40K. The rules are a confusing mess of special snowflake BS and exceptions to exceptions, and the gameplay is a slog.

40K also requires a TON of models to play. It’s horrendous. The barrier to entry is staggering.

GW designed a cool fictional universe that is so good the games succeed despite the rules.

Infinity, from a rules perspective, is intimidating on its face. Just having a reaction system telegraphs that the game is complex.

But it’s actually really easy to learn and play. You can say that new players will have negative experiences when they inevitably get trashed right out of the gate.

But because simple mistakes can be SO punishing in Infinity, you learn very quickly.

And it isn’t a ‘gotcha’ system. You might feel like you got got when you $&@#%* up your facing and eat an AP HMG on Normal rolls, or line up your dudes to get templated to death, but once you learn why that happened and how to avoid it, that lesson applies to ALL of your games.

Infinity does not require me to know how my opponent’s faction works.

I can totally just do my dudes and learn my rules and still play very well.

I can also take ten models and play one list against any opponent in any mission and still do fine. I could do that for years.

I can also take ten models and use them to run 20 different lists.

So not only is Infinity relatively simple, it’s also easy on the wallet compared to a lot of top shelf wargames.

Infinity has a perception problem. I’ve known about it for a decade and only got into it because after not playing anything for a year (work, family, small business, etc.) I told myself I was going to play whatever game my friends were playing at the moment.

It was Infinity. I hemmed and hawed and picked up some models I thought I could stomach.

I read the rules, watched some vids, played a game and BAM! Why have I been crapping on this game so much?!?

CB does itself no favors with the 50 weapons and nested rules and $10 complicated models. It just looks bad from the outside.

But the game is not too complicated. It just looks complicated. And CB could fix that, easily.

 

I am returning to the game after awhile. Have not played for a long time. I am very surprised by changes and updates. But not to complex at all. Very easy to use. I played Age of Sigmar and others for awhile because friends lost interest in Infinity. Those were fun, but very simple. I like more complex. I am happy to come back to Infinity.

 

What really got me into the game was that I thought the game rewarded player choice and agency. Whether it be in list building, positioning, choice of active or reactive pieces the game has a lot of depth that I do like. The people that introduced me to the game really were able to explain to me how my choices could affect the game. I think it’s a skill to show new players cool things about the game without pulling punches. However this is not something that is done alone. We are a community after all. I’ve also heard from players that do not like the hyper competitive nature that some Infinity Meta’s can have and left. I think it’s important to listen to those experiences of other players, to ask what and how they’d like to play in order to grow a healthy community. This will increase that ever important middle pool of players that can satisfy the competitive and casual gaming experiences.

I’ve had new players approach the game and like anything else some have stuck with it whilst others have thought the system was too complex. The most common frustration is that the rules seem so complex that at times it feels like you’re playing another game to the person next to you. I believe introducing newer players to the game is as much of a skill as playing the game competitively. I know people who taught me were patient as hell and I got a lot out of learning from their experiences but I struggle to think what their reward is. ITS system rewards competitive play but even warcor “rewards” wouldn’t accurately reflect the work that goes into building up new players or communities.

I don’t know what the balance is but I would like to see non-competitive elements of the game rewarded. Whether it be through structured play I think we can do more to encourage newer players and create an environment where the game can be grasped and the good aspects of the game be sold to create the interest in the game that’s needed.

 

The biggest problem with Infinity rules isn't the number of them. It's the various interactions between them, especially the more complex ones. Additionally issues with timing, LoF, etc. creep up from time to time.

Most of the rules are pretty straightforward. Including more of them on a single unit doesn't really make the unit harder to use, even for a new player - assuming that their teacher can explain the interaction clearly. It also helps to follow CB's introductory format established in Operation booklets; starting the game using just the unit's statline and weapons, while ignoring special skills - which will get introduced one by one in the subsequent games. It should keep new players from getting overwhelmed.

 

Rules interactions, and rules procedures are better called complications. Complexity speaks to game play, and solutions to in-game situations.

Infinity presents quite a bit of complexity. This is a good thing. It engages the mind. It can be quite immersive. However, frequently breaking this immersion is the intrusion of complications like the need to look things up and determine how they work and interact, or work through various mechanics to resolve something ( the N2 process for settling tied FtF rolls, for example). Too much of this and the game becomes tedious.

The multiplicity of weapons, ammunition, special skills and hacking programs have steadily increased the signal to noise ratio ( or rather increased the noise, not the signal), or complications to complexity ratio. As noted, one must play the game frequently in order to internalize all of the information needed to play the game at anything more than a basic level. It is a lifestyle game. It will always be a lifestyle game. I would like to see the complications reduced so that people who play less frequently ( like Moi) can still play it at more than a basic level. A more casual lifestyle game.

The game is not yet at the tedious point yet, but with more sectorials, and rules and units and special skills coming, it may well become so. My opinion is that there is no other skirmish game out there as fun and rewarding to play as Infinity. For now. I hope that it may stay that way.

 

This is very true. I don't play anywhere near often enough to play quickly.

But this game is very unlike, say, WarmaHordes, where you not only need to play 2-3 games a week but also be on the forums every day, just to avoid being blindsided by model-specific special rules. There are some troops in Infinity that have unique special rules. There aren't many.

Very much so. Back in N2, when I was playing a couple games a week, I always told new players that there are gotcha moments in the game, that player skill matters a whole hell of a lot, so chances were very good that they were going to get surprised and stomped by something new every game for a while. I also told them that if they learned the right lesson from each gotcha, it would only get them ONCE, because there was a way to deal with each one.

Here's the thing, though.

Not everyone is a good teacher. Teaching is not easy. Anyone who thinks that teaching is not a skill in and of itself is fucking delusional. I am a terrible teacher, even for something that I know inside and out, and my parents both taught. My grandmother was a teacher, too. But teaching is not a skill I have.

Also, this game has "WTF, you can do that!?!" moments. The first time you catch someone with a Hidden Deployed model, or Airborne Deployment, or Van Zant, or probably any one of a dozen other things. Showing those things to the new player will probably win the game right then and there. But if the person teaching the new player doesn't show them those gotchas, the teacher is failing.

This is very true. One of the reasons I don't like playing right now is because I have to spend time looking shit up in the middle of a game. I hate that.

I can fix that if I play more. Need a new table, though. Something about 8-12" higher than what we have right now.

Yes, it would be very good if we can lock everything down so that it uses the same mechanisms. Having everything work the same way makes it easy to remember. Hopefully N4 will do that.

 

One thing I do when teaching One on One (Sometimes in our club we have open days for this, and then I try Deathmatch or other funny scenario where more than two people can play at once) is that I always try to make sure each list has only ONE "gotcha" model. There's even a video on facebook where I'm running a demo game (Morats vs PanO) and we get both a Hexa coming out of hidden deployment and punking my sogarat, then a rasyat comes down behind the hexa and shanks him next turn.

EDIT - Video link here:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1457153477732958

It's in portuguese, though.

I think this way people understand that gotcha exists, but don't get frustrated with it because they're not getting hit with ALL the many ways they can get screwed up in a single game. Fighting a force with lots of shennanigans way too soon can feel quite daunting.

There's one friend of mine that has what he calls "The Riddick Method": basically he announces exactly how he is going to kill a model, and using what and, which rules, in as much detail as possible. And then he does just that. It's a little silly but it helps introduce new rules without sounding like you're making them up.

 

Well... I believe in learning curve;)
Demo is always 3 vs 3 models on small paper set table from starter with 1 supply. (capture the flag with some made up fuff;D Because each game should have story:) )
Models are from different factions, but have same stats. All people learn is how orders works, how aro works and how everything happens in same time during order. Also that cover isnt optional;)

After this I got new players attention;) During game we talk, and I can see if he is more into fluff or competetive play. In 1st case I tell him more about background and campaigns in other case I tell about ITS system.

I also mention some of cool Infinity mechanics like camouflage, hacking, transformation etc etc. There is a lot great ideas in this game that can hook players attention;)

By then players knows the basics;)

Then on next meeting we start with small 200 points lists where more real mechanics come into play. Camos, Lt, command tokens, infiltration, smoke;) And real meeting with rules begins, game after game, step by step;)

Point is to introduce just the basics and mention about how Infinity got lots of rules and equipment - COOL rules and equipment;)
This keeps players interested and wanting to know more, not scared about how many things they need to learn.

If You sound scared about rules bloat player will notice and will get second thoughts;) They really can smell fear.

Cheers!

 

I never understood red fury;P Lets be honest its just double shock marksman rifle;)

 

I think the Red Fury was introduced and only after that we had seen Marksman rifles (also RF has more burst than Marksman).

 

Infinity is a complex game. That is good. Some people like complex games. Those that do not like complex games will not like Infinity. Infinity is not for everyone.

That said, there is a discussion that comes up about games from time to time about depth vs complexity. Depth is all the stuff that you can do, and has a direct correlation with how good a game is. Complexity is how much there is to learn. Generally, Complexity is the coin with which a game designer buys Depth. A good game designer spends his Complexity coin wisely to gain a lot of Depth. The ARO mechanic is a fairly simple rule that adds a ton of Depth to the game. This is a good expenditure of Complexity. Guardian is a skill that adds Complexity, but adds little Depth, it is just a slightly different Martial Arts. This is a poor expenditure of Complexity.

Infinity has grown a little messy, and could use some streamlining. With some work, the game could have its Complexity slightly reduced, without losing any Depth. ITS in particular has grown quite messy. I like that something that in-depth exists, but when I suggest missions anymore, I rarely suggest the current ITS games.

From a business perspective, Infinity would benefit greatly from a 'feeder' game. Something simpler to introduce a player to the world and the basic concepts, but then the player could later 'graduate' to the full fledged experience of Infinity. Maybe Aristea! is that game, I have not had the time to investigate that game like I would like. It looks interesting, but I just don't have the time or money right now to try it out.

 

Is the game getting too complex? I'd say no.

As people have rightly already said it's a simple core system (to paraphrase my own explanation "it's blackjack with dice") but with a lot of rules which affect individual troops bolted on.

As @Section9 said it's all in the teaching, and there's nothing wrong with beating newbies as long as:

1. they understand what you're doing (ala the Riddick method @DaRedOne mentioned)
2. they have fun,
3. they learn from what's happening.

If you want to pull your punches try running something you're unfamiliar with or that you know is a dumb list.

Personally when explaining the game I spend most of the game thinking outloud, "Your unit X is going to slow down my advance so I need to deal with it, I could flank it with A, or block off vision to this route with smoke from B, because you're unit Y isn't watching this corner so I could sneak up on X's position. But my game plan is to get forward to this point and put my TAG on suppression, flanking with A won't leave me enough orders to do that so I'll block LOF with B and get forward."

It was mentioned further up that there are too many weapons, that I'll sort of agree with I'd much rather see common weapons with munition types on army, eg: Combi rifle (LMulti) , Combi Rifle (Breaker), Combi rifle (Viral) all neatly stored under the profile Combi rifle.

As for Kill Team, it's not exactly a masterwork but GW seemingly have a market strategy which is simply to drown out competition by flooding the market with things to keep attention, sending out Demo copies and rulebooks to every store on their roster does a very good job of saying "don't look at that, look at this instead."

 

Because I'm personally and professionally interested in how rules get divided up (because they must be divided up), how would you do it differently?

Try this: http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Weapons_Chart

All weapons, grouped by type. That's the default weapon list on the wiki, with the alphabetised version as an alternative.