Hello Infinity players! Please use this thread to share your feedback and feelings about the new Reinforcement rules. Only thing I ask you is to remain polite when discussing and sharing your thoughts with us and the rest of the community. Thank you!
@Koni : The scope of this thread is about the Reinforcement Rules PDF itself? Or it's also including the Reinforcement Profiles added to Infinity Army including the one per army Commlink profile?
Something that is bothering me... When do you place the drop pod marker? When you use the skill or at the beginning of the game? Does it stay in place or it just disappears after the troops deployment? If it stays, does it physically occupy space? Is it "vaultable" for some S value?
NA2 The reinforcement selection was a bit boring compared with the rest with the Samsa being the only new unit. That said I do think the options they did receive to be strong and there seems to be at least a couple of different good ways to build it. Commlink This was a hard fail for NA2. Some NA2 factions just got better choices because they happened to have the "correct" line infantry. There doesn't seem to be any balancing considerations here. For the main factions the fact that Haq and Ariadna get Commlink(+2) seem well thought out as those faction often run lots of cheap units but then Ikari Company which where one of the factions that was hit hardest by the 15 trooper limit doesn't even get a +1 and JSA has to run a out of faction unit even with them having a basic line infantry that just as well could have been given the link. More general the tax on the commlink units seems questionable. If you want to reduce the available points then do so instead of putting a pointless tax on a unit that both players are forced to use.
Placing the drop pod is listed as an effect of the Request Reinforcements which has an activation timing, so it would placed after you have activated the Request Reinforcements rule during the tactical phase of a turn.
While I can understand that CommLink profiles cost extra SWC (changing the format and what lists can do) I am unsure why we all pay seemingly randomly +10 points for the CommLink model. You could have just as easily had us build 240 point lists - the 10 point tax feels bad, even if it for all intents and purposes equal and fair. That said, thank you for all the hard work you have put in Reinforcements! Despite the hiccups, I am glad you keep developing the best miniature game there is. I am excited to play more games with the new mode!
These are my thoughts based on the few games I've played, and from what I've seen from the discussion on the IGL server and main server. The good: - I've enjoyed the game mode itself, as have most (but not all) of the people I've talked to about it. I like the way it has impacted the flow of the game, slowing it down and encouraging more considered gameplay. Alpha striking and aggressiveness seems less prominent, and more objective and positional focused play seems more important. - The rules themselves are decently clear, with just a few little niggles here and there. But it does not feel especially jank or weird to play, it integrates quite naturally. - List building wise, I like the restrictions the 250pts 5 SWC/100 2 SWC adds. It seems to make generic 'good stuff tm' lists harder to build, and encourages more specialization. For example, it's harder to have a robust hacker guided missile package while also running good gunfighters. The format has also increased the value of expensive hard ARO pieces. - In terms of balance between the factions and sectorials, I think the mode has so far been a positive influence. Given that order efficiency is even more important, and big AROs are more valuable, sectorials seem to be more equal with their vanilla counterparts than before. I also wouldn't say that anyone's reinforcements rosters are notably more or less powerful than each other. The meh: - I'm not sure how I feel about the contents of your reinforcements being open information from the start of the game. I can understand that it might be a lot of information to keep hidden and might create some unfun gotcha moments, but it doesn't make a lot of thematic sense, and I think having it being hidden info also might introduce some more interesting mind games with otherwise niche rules like holomask+holoprojector, or decoy. - I don't think I'm a fan of calling down reinforcements before T3 being optional. I think that might lead to some rather degenerate gameplans in certain missions. I've seen some people suggest that reinforcements should be forced to arrive by the bottom of turn 2 and top of turn 3 rather than the top and bottom of turn 3, but I'm not sure how I feel about that. - The drop pod token potentially being a bit of scenery you drop in the middle of the game is something I don't mind in concept, but I'd prefer if it was standardized in the rules to be of a certain silhouette, or something to that effect. The bad: - Zone control missions like Frontline, and similar missions like Acquisition are very unbalanced with reinforcements, especially if calling down reinforcements is optional. The player who takes the bottom of the turn basically autowins. - The current Commlink options are not especially interesting, and are just pure tax. I don't mind the idea of having to include such a profile, but imho there should be some option or choice you can make when doing so - maybe say, a Commlink option that has a worse (+x) value, but is cheaper or isn't SWC costed, or maybe a Commlink option that is a wildcard in the reinforcements fireteams chart. This particular point is perhaps the most consistent piece of criticism I've seen.
I agree with everything above and want to add two more thoughts: 1. It's a shame that NA2 armies don't even get their own box. There are a bunch of profiles and/or loadouts in their REF list that are missing models. Diggers have no model outside TAG Raid, CSUs have one, Bounty Hunters are oop or exclusives. Add the new Marksman Rifle Brawler and you have a 6 mini box like the others (2 Diggers, 2 Bounty Hunters, 1 CSU, 1 Brawler). Resculpt the Anaconda for the blister. Done. I'd wager a lot of people would be happy about a box like that, not only NA2 players. 2. As I argued in the thread before this one, the purpose of the commlink tax is especially hard to understand since it's arbitrary. If it were a tax on something that gives you a bonus over your opponent, it would make sense. But since both players are forced to play the same game mode and pay the exact same tax, it could cost anything, since both players are paying the same price anyway. As it stands, all it does is restrict your listbuilding options from 250pts/5 SWC to effectively ~220pts/4.5 SWC.
I have issues with the Commlink-prerequisite to play this game mode, as it feels like a tax. Why do I have this feeling? Commlink and gameplay are not connected to each other: Commlink is a list building modification / gamemode prerequisite. In the actual game, it does nothing. It is not something I want because it gives me a benefit or because it has some interesting utility. I have to take it to play the game mode I want to play. It is mandatory to play the game mode. I must add the commlink-trooper to my list: This costs me points, swc and a trooper-slot. While some lists would use that trooper anyways and only pay the increased points + swc costs, other lists must include that trooper even if they do not want that trooper (but the player wants to play the game mode). Those lists pay for the trooper + the commlink + the slot While Commlink +1 and Commlink +2 negate the "trooper slot cost", it would feel better if these bonusses were not used to (partially) "pay the tax", but to actually increase my listbuilding options If I play with 250 pts + 100pts reinforcement, my main force has 50 pts less than in a regular 300 pts game. This is a change and I have to get used to it. But on top of this, there comes the tax and I play with ~230 points + 1 trooper I would not have taken otherwise (in many of my lists) I do not have options for the commlink (different commlink versions, commlink on different profiles, "cheap commlink options" or "more expensive commlink options that give a an interesting benefit") I just feel that the alternative could be "both players agree on playing with reinforcements, then they play reinforcements". The Commlink could be a purely game mode specific, optional extra. On the positive side: I like that some expensive models get Tactical Awarenes in their reinforcement version (like Bronzes from O-12). This counters the limited orders in the reinforcements if you take an expensive model.
Not having played it yet, a couple of random thoughts: Having just one commlink option per faction is understandable (especially in the beginning), but is very restrictive. Hoping that gets expanded a bit at some point, with different commlink "sizes" and varying SWC and point costs. Would be nice to have more specs on the drop pod token, especially this: is it just an abstract token, or a piece of scenery you can hide behind? If the latter (and I think it is), please specify a silhouette value for it (otherwise having a 40mm wide 12" tower with sniper nest on top is arguably legal, though obviously not the intent) :) A minor point needing clarification: the reinforcement cannot be deployed inside buildings, but are rooftops and balconies legal? Our local Discord group was unsure of this, just a short while ago. In general, I'm feeling positive about all this, but as noted, no games with it yet.
I've only played three games with Reinforcements so far. It's possible I'll come around to it after more games. With that disclaimer, here are my feelings on it so far: It's boring. Things Reinforcements troops have: Guns Skills to shoot guns better (Mim, Msv) CC Extra orders to spend on shooting and CC (NCO, tac aware) Specialists Things they don't have: Marker states Smoke (except the Igao mirrorball) Deployment skills (except mechanized deployment) Minelayer Impetuous Total reaction Albedo (I haven't checked this one) On top of all that, they have to all deploy in the same place on the table, so you can't do much interesting with multiple attack vectors. You just pick the best spot to shoot from, drop your reinforcements there, and spend 4-8 orders shooting. Maybe push a button if you have orders left at the end. It's a far cry from the rest of Infinity with all its strategy around outmaneuvering your opponent. And it's a really boring order pool to run through, just rolling the same dice over and over. The positive comments on Reinforcements that I've seen are that it improves the flow of the game, as players have to be prepared for the counterpunch. That may be. It's still a potentially positive effect on flow before the Reinforcements drop. Maybe having to prepare for your opponent's Reinforcements makes the first phase of the game more fun, I'm not sure. But the actual arrival of the Reinforcements still heralds a super boring end phase to the game. The other consequence of the mechanic is that the player who drops their Reinforcements second gets an enormous advantage. The first player to drop is stuck trying to attack their opponent's entrenched position, and has a limited selection of targets, so it's very difficult for them to use their 4-8 orders to good effect. The second player to drop gets to attack the first player's Reinforcements, which are a much easier target - they're all clustered in one spot in the midfield and have very limited defensive skills. If they advanced, which they probably had to do to be effective, you can even shoot them in the back. And you get to choose exactly where to drop to best attack them. This is a problem whether dropping is optional or mandatory. If it's optional, second player can always drop after first player, so the game will generally be decided by the Lt roll. If it's mandatory, then first player is forced to alpha strike to try desperately to do 100 points of damage by turn 2 to force a Reinforcements drop - the game will generally be decided by whether they succeed. On that note, a lot of players were hoping that Reinforcements would be a solution to the perceived excessive role that alpha strikes play in Infinity. I'm not convinced that it is. It's still just as effective for first player to alpha strike. If you cripple your opponent's main list, their Reinforcements won't be enough to save them, especially since you also get your own Reinforcements in due course. In fact, in some cases it's probably easier to alpha strike at 240 points than at 300. You can still bring the same full-powered alpha strike piece backed by a full order pool, but your opponent has fewer points and models to defend against it. The point range does make some specific alpha strike harder. In particular, the Anathematic list is probably impossible, which is a big benefit to the format (although that list has also been nerfed at 300 points via the much-needed Bit and Kiss change). But other alpha strikes will be the same or easier. Bears are likely to be particularly brutal. Reinforcements does mean that the victim of an alpha strike gets to keep playing, and at least have some orders to spend in subsequent turns. I think the sense of agency here will be an illusion, though. After having your main list crushed, you do get to spend orders on your Reinforcements but you won't be able to do much with them, and they will then be crushed in turn by your opponent's intact main list and Reinforcements. Personally I don't think a catchup mechanic was needed, as I never had a problem with conceding at the end of turn 1 if my opponent has already won the game. Drawing out the inevitable through a new set of order pools doesn't seem like a plus to me. The minor issues don't bother me. The Commlink tax is silly but not a big deal. Open info reinforcements is fine. We need clarity on the shape of drop pods but that's easily provided. My bigger issues are with the overall design of the extra which, so far, I haven't found a way to enjoy.
250 point main force as a “standard sized game” Issues: The main force has serious building constraints due to the small size. It exacerbates problems that were already present in 300 point games without reinforcements. It makes alpha striking easier to achieve, there are fewer defenses present to stop it, and it railroads list building towards hyper efficient cut throat units. Potential fix: Stop endorsing specific points levels as “standard”. Obviously the actual fix is to simply increase the points you play to fix the problem, it seems stupid but unfortunately many gaming groups are unable or unwilling to think for themselves and will mindlessly only play one game mode, oblivious to options outside of a perceived “tournament mainstream” box. To quote another user who plays in a different location to me on their experiences trying to play different points level games Reinforcements taking too long to arrive Issues: Right now the requirement for reinforcements to arrive is about 40% of the main force is required to be casualties. So far that number has felt too high, causing situations where they‘re arriving too late to assist the main force in a meaningful fashion with one player’s main force already too weakened to be able to have a decent chance of turning things around. At the moment reinforcements only feel meaningful in a closely contested game, if a match has already become one sided the player who is 40% behind will not have enough tools still left to contest the mission making his reinforcements worthless, while the player who is significantly ahead won’t see theirs until the game is over making the game mode relatively pointless for both players. Right now it’s entirely possible for a player to lose a TAG plus more troopers on turn 1 and still not qualify for desperately needed reinforcements. Potential fix: Lower the barrier of entry for reinforcements, 40% is way too high. Shoot for a number between 20-30% of casualties for the main force to give the reinforcements a better chance of actually having a force present on the table for them to support when they arrive. Commlinks are a massive tax Issues: Commlinks are causing a triple tax on players. They take up a trooper slot in the list, they take up SWC, and they cost extra points. None of this feels good and just causes issues when building army lists without being beneficial to the game mode Potential fix: Stop charging points and SWC for the commlink. This is an optional game mode that both players are agreeing to play, they shouldn’t be getting charged points or SWC to include this extra model into their lists. Linetrooper commlinks should add no extra units to their army and be completely free to include. Commlinks aren’t varied enough Issues: The fact that basically only line troopers provide commlinks makes the mode feel stagnant and railroads list building for no good reason. Choosing an LT is an engaging choice during list construction for most players whereas choosing a commlink is not, it’s literally just ticking a box. Potenial fix: As mentioned earlier Linetrooper commlinks should be free and cost no extra points or SWC, and should not provide and +1s to trooper counts. There should be more profiles that are upgrade options. For example you pay 11 points for a Zhanshi commlink, or have the choice of a 16 point Zhanshi that adds +1 to the trooper count, or pay for a Daoying that’s 32 points and adds +2 and has the Specialist Operative trait. Options are good and increase player agency during list construction. Wording on reinforcement requirements are ambiguous: Issues: Right now people are discussing a loophole with deliberately playing lower point lists to cheese the reinforcements into arriving automatically on turn 1. It’s not a good strategy because it’s unreliable and requires a player to go first, but it’s a strategy that will inflict a negative play experience when it does work. Potential fix: Change the wording on the Request Reinforcements to require X points of the army in a Null state to activate reinforcements, this closes the loophole. Certain missions are uninteractive with the reinforcements Issues: Missions that score at the end of the game and/or utilise scoring “zones”, such as Frontline or Frostbyte can be abused with the fact that reinforcements do not trigger AROs when arriving. This can lead to uninteractive gameplay if player 2 simply deploys their reinforcements into scoring zones and then does not activate them. It leads to a very anticlimactic game. Potential fix: Missions that have heavy use scoring Zones or features that do not require reinforcements to spend orders to score should have their own rules in the ITS packet that force Reinforcements to deploy on turn 2 rather than turn 3. This will make sure there is a chance for players to interact with the reinforcements before the game ends.
I've seen arguments that reinforcements makes alphas easier and harder. Just to summarize the arguments I've seen: Arguments that it's harder/less good: - 250/5 SWC with commlink tax and the slot limits makes building strong alpha striking forces harder. E.g., it's harder to get an effective GML package going without it skewing your list hard. - You have less orders on the board T1 to execute an alpha strike. - Less bodies makes defensive deployment easier. - The counterpunch from reinforcements after an alpha strike is potentially devastating given that they can arrive in the perfect position. - Reinforcements makes hard ARO pieces and set ups more appealing. Generally, the arguments that state it's easier/as good/better: - Dropping reinforcements second is very powerful, to the point of nullifying whatever damage a counterpunching reinforcements group could do (although if reinforcements are optional to drop I guess this doesn't matter?). - Slot limits makes it harder to field enough bodies to defend hard alphas. - Having to lose 100 points to trigger reinforcements and get your counterattack is too much. - 250/5 SWC with commlink tax is too little to build a list resilient to the best alpha strikes.
I think some of that comes down to player bias. I know factions like ariadna will be happy to continue ramming bears and dogs downfield with significantly less aro presence, nomads with UFK etc but avatar and other apex hunters are less happy. I've had a game and got another game coming up. Other than the excellent points articulated well above, my main concern is that most forces are too limited in what they can bring and end up arriving turn 3 and are largely ineffective as you've probably got a haris + dude or equivalent amount of orders. Factoring in some movement, you might be able to shoot 2-3 times on turn 3. Tag reinforcements are pointless because of this reasonm they're on the board too little to be effective. Have you considered 4 game rounds, 20 order groups (mininum of 5 in reinforcements) at 300pts plus 100 reinf?
Ok, so reupping my analysis and some games. Edits in blue Commlink needs to be reworked or removed entirely, as it is now at best gives 1 order to the reinforcements if it has survived, and its only use is a cheerleader. A game selling interaction between players at all times should avoid cheerleaders as much as possible. Option 1: allow us to add the Commlink spec to any troop like in the past the master breacher and the like. Boring, but better than merely forcing us to take a basic troop that doesn't even serve as a Lt decoy. Option 2: make the Commlink skill Private information until the troop changes to the Reinf groop. At least it serves as an Lt decoy. Option 3: remove commlink altogether. Option 4: change it so the Drop Pod markers have to be placed during initial deployment, making it an important part of the game the act of controlling the Landing Zone. This allows for the creation of Commlink (Decoy) skill, allowing those Commlink troops that offer no increase in troop slots to offer the option of placing more than one Drop Pod marker. After this, it can be decided if the real drop pod is decided on deployment (as part of regular one, after the last reserve model of both players have been placed, etc...) or at the arrival of reinforcements phase (discarding all decoys but one). In this way, spam factions have to decide if they commit troops or not, while elite factions don't just eat lemons. Option 5: Make reinforcements enter from one border of their player's half of the table, by default no further in (without crossing over the middle) than 5cm (2 inches), and all from the same border. While you can choose which border, the Commlink may also have +5cm for example, allowing for deeper deployment. Reinforcements trigger being "having equal or less Victory Points than the table" is open to abuse. Trigger could be "player has suffered X amount of casualties" Locked at turn 2, regardless of situation. This allows the Reinforcements to always be important, to not enter when the game ends just to score points, and block shenanigans wth VPs (I like this one the best since it conveys a narrative of extra help coming/alarm triggered, etc...) MANDATORY Roll LT's WP for Reinforcements arrival, with the option to make it automatic with 1 token being expended after turn 1(I don't like making the reinforcements to arrive randomly, however). To call on reinforcements, you need to activate a console (specifically placed, or as part of the scenario's scoring) on the game's table, and this will call BOTH player's reinforcements in the next turn, at the same time (this increases shootout intensity, but lets both players control when the reinforcements will arrive, and since they do so in the next turn, the first player can try to block their use as mere scoring cheerleaders) Reinforcement group being completely public information makes it so the opponent almost has perfect information. Point counting was already a great skill to develop to identify marker/disguise/Out of Table (OoT) shenanigans, but now it's even easier. Reinforcements effectively remove any risk of enemy Retreat, giving both players a completely free first turn. Skilled players, however, may want to edge their opponents so they remove only specific pieces before their reinforcements arrival. This makes Eclipse and other "game blockers" even more useful to burn enemy orders and fulfill objectives uninmpeded. Flash pulse as ARO becomes more attractive. IMM and "can't attack" states (EM ammo, PARA ammo, Flash Pulse...) become much more desirable gear since they can remove an enemy troop while at the same time won't trigger reinforcements... Mechanized Deployment reutilized as the drop pod's mechanic is all nice and well, but any way of deploying extra troops will have advantages and disadvantages depending on the mission. For Armory style missions, place more points in a lane/quarter of the table, etc..., they give a lot of advantage to the second player. There is no mechanic to check if the Reinforcements points trigger is reversable. Let's say I have a Marut and a Dakini Unconscious, in a 250+100pts game. Reinforcements arrive and I spend 2 orders raising both troops to 1 STR available (and I can devote another 2 orders to top the Marut), now I have 350pts vs 250... having the reinforcements integrated in a preexisting group would incetivate not going this way, since you can't move a trooper into a group with Unconscious troops.At least TAG reinforcements or other really expensive troops do want this.
Commlink. I think one thing they could do, due to even being the comms guy, is that that figure gains TacAware. He’s the one that knows most of what’s going on the battle field after all. I'd be a bit more willing to pay the points and swc for that.
That! I'm not sure 250+100 was ideal. Just like we tell CodeOne players to start N4 with low point single combat group and gradually go up. I think players used to 300 would have had a better time adapting if they played several 300+100 first (getting the hang on Reinf) before dropping down to 250+100 (and having to now deal with cutting out Pts and SWC from the main list). Or, like I said before Reinf came out, in order to play 250+100 we really should have started doing some practice 250Pts non-reinf games first. (And then we would still have had the surprise of losing an extra 0.5swc)
