Things I like about Critical hits: Automatically winning the face to face Things I don’t like: Bypassing arm & BTS entirely. Compromise solution: Crits negate arm or BTS bonus from cover or firewall. Still auto win the face to face.
I... actually like crits the way they are. Now, that might be colorized by the fact that I tend to be on the good side of lady luck, so I tend to get more crit streaks in my favour than against me, so whatever. But I'm just going to point out that potential crit changes absolutely must take two things into account: 1. Don't fuck up my CC. Auto winning the FtF is useless on a berserker, start over. 2. You're gonna have to fix Tarik. Again. And no, making separate rules for crits in BS and CC is not a good idea. It is a terrible idea.
Any faction can opt out of the hacking rules with the right troop selection. Tohaa and Ariadna probably lose the least from doing so. The worst off in that regard are Onyx and some of the heavily HI-themed sectorials. Even then, though, you can make some pretty decent MO lists that are mostly orders sergeants.
People have brought up CC a number of times. I think it's worth remembering that in 2nd edition, CC was not so centered on troops getting criticals (outside of berserk). A major system change like rewriting the critical rules will of course also require rewriting parts of the game that heavily depend on criticals for their effectiveness. There are ways you could make CC good without relying on crits.
To be honest I love everything about crits as they are ruled now. And I have been on both sides of the table. I have even lost a tournament match because of six crits in a row in turn 3. But I have always tried to analyze my games. And I could have won even that match if I would have followed my plan better to avoid that rampage in the last turn. So it is never only about crits. Try to improve your playstyle.
So, it wasn't an exaggeration that roughly a few dozens of people is basically an entire community of Infinity, eh? :P Because that was an order of numbers in those polls.
What I like about crits: giving every unit a change to win a firefight against nearly every unit, so the auto winning the face to face What I don't like: the instant wound Lets see lot of missions got 3 rounds, if we say both sides take 10 order its around 20 orders per player for the whole game, so 40 orders in total, lets say half of them are used for shootouts that makes 20 but at average a weapon got a burst of 3 so 60 + the reactive action around 80, crits got a 1 in 20 change would mean around 4 crits per game in general, if these are on the wrong rolls you are loosing a huge centerpiece to that. Are crits broken? Not really Infinity is balanced pretty damn well. But if you got bad luck you can loose or win without it being your fault, I had a few games that way. So I don't think crits should be removed, they should keep the auto win for face to face and some damage bonus but the insta wound not so much just my opinion I think this discussion is fascinating
My preferred change has been that Criticals either Win the FTF roll and beat all openents dice. OR Cause an automatic wound but that die no longer gets counted in the FTF resolution The player chooses one of these options when they roll a critical.
What do I hate about the critical system: The people who complain about criticals, without realizing that criticals are there to frustrate your plans. The critical system in Infinity is designed to do one very important thing: Say "No" to someone stacking up the perfect modifiers on the perfect unit. That's why it's both an automatic win on the face-to-face and automatic application of effects (bypassing one ARM/BTS roll). Losing one roll and passing the other roll doesn't accomplish that. Critical effects with template weapons demonstrates that there is a line that the designers that would be too far. Death, taxes, and criticals. Disclaimer: This post takes no position concerning the Tohaa or the design of their abilities.
I hate being the benefactor of a crit far more than how annoying it is to receive a crit. I hate what it says about my victory, it makes it feel cheap. It wasn't my manoeuvring, prioritisation or tactical ability that won me the game, it was a damned dice roll. Makes it feel dirtier than when you get a rule wrong and realise a turn or a day later that you benefited greatly from the erroneous interaction. The dice are sufficient assholes that I don't need crits for the dice to say "No" to my plans, and the game is designed to as often as possible allow this to happen, which is why I try really hard not to attack TR HMGs with anything less than ODD, Cover and negative rangeband. At which point crits can't happen anymore anyway. So, to recap; Crits I roll are bad. Crits I receive are inconsequential. Shite non-crit roll streaks are what ruins my plans. Constantly.
And you go on to explain the value of Criticals in the game as it's been designed; which key aspect seems badly undervalued when you only have to look at WH40K to see that despite 25 years of constant development, cohesive design can be elusive! The basic game mechanisms of Infinity are not only designed to be different to those in other tabletop games, they guarantee that when it's played by the book, the game also feels different to other game in quite unique and - for myself at least, satisfying ways. So although I enjoy the insights of my more erudite brethren this discussion of Criticals seems much like the attempts to manage ARO's via the Interpretation That Cannot Be Named - to make Infinity safer, more predictable and more comfortingly familiar. Yes, we are free to keep the models we love, the rich universe of the game and those rules we are happy with, but we could also disregard our preconceptions and appreciate the game the designers have spent the best part of their adult lives working on. They've made a game that's dangerous, unpredictable and even disturbing. It's not an accident; it's designed that way.
I like crits. I don't like Fatality L2. I don't like 'Mates and the interaction they have with crits as a supposed balancer That said, I absolutely will be taking Tarik with Spitfire against Tohaa in the future on the reg, on account of war crimes not being war crimes when they're committed on the Tohaa.
OK, So, heres the thing, you may not have noticed but you might be aware that the posters discussing the game here are very different to the previous discussion, usually with differing views to what would be required for your statement above to be correct. For example half the people arguing they like crits also disagree with you quite strongly on the other matter (Me for example). that is a stance that is irreconcilable with the statement you just made. So yeah, I can only conclude that you have raised the spectre of that previous discussion to either take a dig at those in the community you dislike or to try and stirr the pot and continue that argument in a thread unrelated to it. Such antagonistic behaviour is not fit for this community, nor do I really think you will find it tolerated long term. Continue to behave like this and you will garner a reputation.
I don't think that's entirely fair @daboarder There certainly does seem to be a similar thread running 'through both discussions, with at least some having in common in each that they are trying to make the game more predictable overall. Insinuating that this similarity does not exist, and that discussing it is tantamount to poor conduct on the forum is out of order.
Oh there definitely is a desire for the game to be more predictable. But the groups of posters are pretty unique. So the group in case 1 and the group in case 2 are composed of different members, usually entirely. As such drawing a parallel, and drawing it in a way that its used to both dismiss the discussion of a group of posters in either case is really just rude in my opinion. EDIT: And thats without even getting into the discussion on alternate crit mechanics like Fat2 or the discussion on Mates ect. Realistically the statement reads as no more than taking a dig at people
I suppose if you read only that snippet in isolation from the rest of the post then I can understand that perspective. But it's not an isolated snippet, and the context in which it was made makes the relationship between the positions taken clear. *shrugs* I mean, you do you, but know that if there's anyone bringing the "tone" of this conversation down they aren't alone.
"Definitely" is a strong word for your allegation. And how is this game not predictable? In all my Infinity matches I had never a situation when only the dice decided the game. And in almost all matches there had been odd FtF rolls but in retrospective I also could have played better as well. And to say something constructive: If you change Crits (and I am 100 % sure Corvus Belli tested other approaches to Crits), you might destroy game balance. First, you would have to change Symbiomates. Second, you would have to adapt ARM values and so on... CB did a great job to balance this game we love and made the - in my opinion - best and fairest tournament game at the moment. And Crits as how they are being ruled now are a part of it.
