Didn't they do the Beyond Wildfire video the week after the baseline videos...I could be mis-remembering, but here is to hoping
the reason for only 4 is not that they cannot make all other list, is just that they want that C1 will be new "base" product. They could do that, but because there will be no C1 product for those factions, CB think is unneded to release rules
As much as I can see that they want to use C1 as an opportunity to produce the O-12 miniatures, I think that because it's the newest it shouldn't be in C1 in favor of another well established faction (Nomads/Ariadna would probably be my thought). I wanted to use C1 as an opportunity to bring more players into our player base. Currently it's only me and a friend on a regular basis. We've been playing pretty much just each other for two years and hoped C1 could bring in new people. Between the two of us only he plays one faction that's being released in C1. I don't want to have to buy into another faction when I already play 2.5 just to use this as an opportunity to get more people into the game in my area.
I think the inclusion of O-12 and Combined Army in Code One has a lot more to do with the fact that they were in the last Operation box then CB using Code One as a vehicle to product more O-12 models.
That could be it too. There are probably many reasons they chose O-12. I'm still disappointed that they didn't pick a wider spread faction for the sake of including existing players to promote it to newer ones. I know that I could just Proxy my models, but I much prefer playing them for what they are. I don't even need new Nomad models, just the rules and valid lists so that we can successfully demo C1 with what we already have.
I actually wonder how much work it takes to transfer a faction from the main ruleset to Code One. I think it would be an interesting piece of information for the playerbase to look at.
CodeOne is not just infinity simplified but it also should give a guidance to new players and gameshops. When you look at the CodeOne roadmap and PanO/YuJing list for CodeOne, the profiles in the list actually match well with the products in the roadmap(3 for the beyond box, 6 for two booster packs, tag, remote, support). I think preparing this product line is the most reason for adding 2 factions per year for CodeOne. Also in ruleset, CodeOne is restricted in one combat group and a lot of rules will be absent compared to N3/N4. Also, the CodeOne PanO and YuJing lists are limited to 25 profiles (including mercenaries). I think the missing factions might had some problems to fit into CodeOne (limiting one combat group for Ariadna, reducing special rules from Haqq and Tohaa, etc).
Yeah, they'll also be the first two split into the Action Packs of Operation team + Beyond team, though not sure when that'll happen in the overall scheme of things. Then next year, Operation: FrozenNipples will have two new armies and Kaldstrom& Beyond will become action packs. I'm just not sure why they can't update Army for some of the other units while waiting for the physical releases.
It's Operation: Tikibeach, enough of this winter malarkey, we need some tropical representation! Marketing, C1 is positioned as a range of products stores can stock that will grow Infinity as a game in their community. Whilst I'm glad they're not going as heavily "no model = no rules" as some other companies, I understand the business justifications given about matching up what's on the shelf and what's in the Army builder.
Yeah, as disappointed as I am that there's no Nomad Code 1 release I think it's entirely reasonable. Just means I can anticipate a solid new CJC starter in ~12 months as the core of the Nomads Code 1 force.
I completely agree, this really stands out to me as jarring. I love the flavour and fluff in miniature war games, and removing it in favour of just describing what they do pushes it further into a board game feel vs that of a miniature game. I think this will lead to more people disconnecting the universe from the game, and to me that's a negative thing. I also didn't find much of an issue with nested rules. I think the problem before was the inconsistency of some rules, where they almost worked identically to others, but with slight changes like the multiple types of marker states, or the 16 different CC skill tables, or the various nested skills between them. I have examples for ways I think would have been good fixes, but we're long past when speculating or suggesting them could have had any difference. I won't stop playing if we have to deal with infantile names for skills, I love this game, I love the universe, and I'll still know what the various skills and equipment are called in game, either from playing before the change or from reading about the universe. But I'll die a little inside every time I have to play against someone who doesn't know the first thing about the fluff or lore of their own faction. And unfortunately I expect that to become more common place with these changes.
I definitely like the new naming. For somebody who does not play very often, it makes it muuuch easier to play. That's exactly the kind of thing that would make me and other players of my group who gave up on infinity come back to it. I definitely understand the choice of O-12 and CA. Not only it's the most recent operation box, but O-12 is very beginner friendly AND both are being heavily used in Defiance. Pano and Yu Jing also make perfect sense, since they are some of the most common factions, along with nomads. Pity i don't play any of the 4,but they definitely make sense. We'll get nomads vs Aleph next year, potentially, with new minis for both (steel phalanx could do with new minis)
Was that really such a big problem compared to having to constantly be on the forums, so you would know how some rules have to be played and on top of that, the answers to that are mostly not even official. What I really disliked in the last months was, if you played a game against someone isnt a lot on the forums and only goes by the rules and FAQ, you have to convince that player, that what someone in the forum says is the right way play and not what is written in the official documents. It stalls the game and sometimes creates the feeling in people, you want to cheat them.
I've literally been accused of stalling and cheating when I tried to explain to someone how Symbiomates and their Total Immunity interactions work now, for example. Not a nice experience.
I love crazy names like hyper dinamics and kinematics and am sad to see them go. That said I'd prefer a rule set that was clear and easy to understand (especially for new players) rather than one that is confusing. Remembering the difference between those abilities are second nature now but it took a while, so did things like dogged and nwi. Any simplification that can be done with just renaming abilities is very welcome, it allows the game to keep it's deep interactions I enjoy while helping people learn to play. Essentially it's low hanging fruit.
Infinity's proxy rules are extremely liberal. You can just use Ghulams as Fusiliers and Janissaries as ORCs, ect... This isn't a very big problem in my opinion.