1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

Balancing for player skill

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by Superfluid, Jan 14, 2018.

  1. the huanglong

    the huanglong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    947
    Likes Received:
    1,951


    Please watch the order played out from 32:37. Note there is no theoretical position that is different from the physical location. Both Carlos and Killian cooperate to help Killian position his model in it's intended position. Does this type of play bother you?
     
  2. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,025
    Likes Received:
    2,017
    I don't think the game is balanced for ARO units to be able to stack just by standing next to each other.

    The risk of a particular ARO multiplies exponentionally when it can involve multiple high quality AROs.

    Not to mention, placing two good ARO models next to each other behind a wall isn't exactly the pinnacle of strategic genius.

    If you rely on playing it where it lies, this kind of defensive formation becomes quite binary - either you get it right and have a risky fire fight with just one high quality ARO. or you get it wrong and probably die.
     
  3. deep-green-x

    deep-green-x Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    810
    Guys please don't use any of the BOW videos to backup any rules arguments. Carlos and I have gotten the rules wrong frequently and often times we don't realise it until much later.

    I mean I once infamously forgot that I had an AD unit that I could have dropped in to win the game. A model player I am not.
     
    david_lee and Abrilete like this.
  4. daboarder

    daboarder Force One Commander
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    thats cool man thats mostly what they are arguing, even palanka has gotten rules clearly wrong, not the least because of his claim that an opponent had cover when they moved from out of cover to cover in the same order.

    the point is the videos are null, they are neither rules accurate nor intent accurate and as such readily dismisable
     
    Abrilete likes this.
  5. deep-green-x

    deep-green-x Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    810
    People get stuff wrong all the time, I think it might actually be impossible to play a game of infinity without making at leat one error.

    Unless the video is very specifically about a certain rule or mechanic I wouldn't use it as a guide and even then there's different interpretations of some rules as we well know.

    I've been baby minding all day and I see the Intent thread ran its course and imploded in some sort of insult singularity?

    I really think the agressive tone from both sides ruined their arguments, especially from the Play by Intent side of which I was/am part.

    How about we just drop the intnet discussion for now and play as we want until someone at CB feels it's a good idea to put out an FAQ.
     
    Sabin76, Superfluid, Stiopa and 2 others like this.
  6. daboarder

    daboarder Force One Commander
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2017
    Messages:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    thats the conclusion stiopa and i came too
     
    Stiopa likes this.
  7. the huanglong

    the huanglong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    947
    Likes Received:
    1,951
    Relax, that's not what's happening. I'm asking the thread if they were OK with the way the order was resolved, not telling them they should be because you did it.
     
  8. Alkasyn

    Alkasyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    620
    If you do not make serious attempts at communicating, don't expect people to take your questions seriously.

    Yes, I am saying that extending ARO time past "reasonable amount of time" is not an issue in a normal environment, and if you're having problems annoying people, you should be looking past the game and into the domain of social skills.
     
  9. Andre82

    Andre82 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    455
    Likes Received:
    547
    I think with how complicated the game is you are probably correct about it being impossible to play a game of infinity without making an error. However I think watching what happens IS massively informative mistakes and all.

    As for the intent thread.I kind of felt like it was making ground despite the growing out of control insults lol. I am pretty sure I fully understand why the other side reads it and feels the way they do.
     
  10. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    If someone can spend time to gain an advantage, and their opponent gets angry when they take the time to gain that advantage, the opponent is fundamentally upset because their opponent is playing to win. Not win at all costs, just playing to win. And there are definitely people (poor sportsmen) who get angry when their opponent takes that kind of time. I think people who support the "gotcha" style of play are populated by these people; those angry that their opponents have the temerity to try to win.
     
    Ebon Hand likes this.
  11. deep-green-x

    deep-green-x Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    810
  12. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    5,734
    And I have to agree, the massive thread was closed because of such behaviour, that will not happen to the new threads, please stick to the forum policy.
     
  13. Flipswitch

    Flipswitch Sepsitorised by Intent
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,606
    Likes Received:
    2,160
    don't argue nerds

    what is everyones favourite topping on toast? im partial to marmite myself
     
    Cothel likes this.
  14. FatherKnowsBest

    FatherKnowsBest Red Knight of Curmudgeon

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2017
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    656
    De Ruyter Hagelslag
     
    Cothel and CoveredInFish like this.
  15. A Mão Esquerda

    A Mão Esquerda Deputy Hexahedron Officer

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    1,710
    Manjar.
     
  16. Alphz

    Alphz Kuang Shi Vet. Retired.

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,025
    Likes Received:
    2,017
    O
    OH MAN I love that shit
     
    FatherKnowsBest likes this.
  17. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    3,019
    Likes Received:
    5,734
    I have to eat that from Holland...
     
  18. Hachiman Taro

    Hachiman Taro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    764
    You know I think a lot of this debate stems from a basic misunderstanding.

    The play it where it lies camp (possibly including CB) basically wants to play a more casual fun game where part of that fun is a lack of min-maxing positions, and rolling with what cool things happen.

    The intent camp want to play a highly competitive, razor fine balanced game where sportsmanship and mutual fairness is maintained by cooperation and agreement between players.

    The intent camp imagines what the game played super competitively with play it as it lies rules would be like (ie, with gotchas, arguments over exact positioning and serous incoherence in the rules re: exact placement of models (eg models that can't physically be placed in cover while facing the right way due to out sizing their silhouette, models and terrain getting knocked, models moving slightly when replaced with silhouettes etc) to the extent that the game is actually very difficult to play that way competitively at top levels.

    The play it where it lies camp imagines the game played with intent by their opponent to perfect geometric precision in a win at all costs manner sucking all the fun out of a game that otherwise has an awful lot of rule of cool appeal.

    A lot of it comes down to how strong you find defence too re: pie slicing etc. I find casual players find alpha striking and perfect pie slicing too strong and a significant source of unfun games. Getting wiped out before you move isn't fun. On the other hand I think the very best competitive players are the very best at reactive play (often to an extent casual players don't at all understand) and so find the idea of more prospect of multiple AROs due to accidental misplacement problematic on a number of levels (both because such players tend to value knowable information and precision, and feel games need to be balanced sufficiently towards offence not to become frustrating grinds or stalemates ala WW1).

    I feel like there's actually room for both those styles of play in the game though. Maybe the basic rules could be clarified one way, and the ITS the other? Then everyone basically gets what they want, except perhaps the extreme zealots in both camps.
     
    #78 Hachiman Taro, Jan 21, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2018
    Sabin76, Plebian, Alphz and 3 others like this.