Thank you for linking this indepth data analysis. It was very informative and it was a joy to watch the exploration of the statistics for N4. I took a few major things from the video: More people need to remember to upload their lists to OTM. It provides a treasure trove of very useful information. The information presented generally aligned with the infographics that CB provided earlier this year. I hope that the fact that this independent data analysis collaborated what CB told us will hopefully have people be less dismissive in the future. The Australian meta really likes Combined Army. I am glad that we have a community that is committed to doing such data diving.
New version for ITS 14. https://downloads.corvusbelli.com/infinity/organized-play/its-rules-season-14-en-v14.1.pdf Post: https://www.facebook.com/Infinityth...1hk9nBSmcvcc4VtANLqAU7KTwGCz8yu23vl?__tn__=-R
No, I don't want vanilla armies to be removed. I think the more the merrier, though it definitely makes harder for CB to balance that many armies and especially vanilla armies. I think SEF and MO were steps in the right direction, but sadly too timid. I don't think unit AVAs and fireteams are enough in some cases to warrant losing access to wide variety of units, especially after the fireteam re-work.
Some already have that though. I can't take Devas and Dakinis for instance in Vanilla but I can in IS. Also vanilla is still very limited in AVA for many troops. There's been many times where I wanted more than one of something.
This is one of the main things that could be improved in Infinity’s current balance. Where it has been done, it is really good. I have faith in the quality (if slow pace) of the developers’ vision for the evolution of the game though. I started playing ISS partly because I loved the first mixed links in the game (Crane and Celestials). Years later, those combined arms forces are a defining element in the game. I have a feeling sectorial mixes with unique units and loadouts not in vanilla will follow a similar trajectory.
Vanilla is fine. Wanting it to be removed is a pretty extreme position. Stop using that as a distraction from discussion of ways to tweak balance between vanilla and sectorials.
Probably the easiest thing is to reduce the AVA further on some troops in Vanilla. For instance, CA shouldn't have AVA4 Taiga and AVA Total Gakis and Preta. It should be AVA2 each at most. They could still be higher AVA in Morats and Shasvastii. Also, many troops have been AVA2 since the beginning of the game. Maybe it's time for them to be AVA1 instead. Guilang, Moran, Shrouded, etc. I know when I play vanilla, 2 Guilang is almost the start for me. The same with Shrouded in CA.
Solid recommendation and easy to do. This is an easily moved lever to balance things a bit. Morans too for sure. I always always take 2, and see 2 in the great majority of vanilla lists. The question is how many of these trimmings can be done and maintain good balance, and how many need to be traded off. For example lowering Taigha/Pretas to 2 each (which is really necessary), but leaving Shrouded at 2 might be appropriate. Nerfing always needs the least amount of intervention possible, both for balance and to minimize player annoyance. And it should be balanced with profiles added or restricted to sectorials, giving them some reason to be taken.
It would force vanilla to have more variety. If I can't have two Guilang, I'll need to take a ninja or Kanren. It would kind of suck but be good too.
Goonhammer has reported on one of their tournaments, with a lists and missions analysis. Infinity Tournament Report: St Alban's Smackdown, 3 décembre 2022 https://www.goonhammer.com/infinity-tournament-report-st-albans-smackdown-3-december-2022/
New stats video from Quiet Professional. Quiet Professional https://www.youtube.com/@quietprofessional4557 Infinity N4 | Vanilla Factions | Trooper Considerations | ITS Data
How is anything confirmed? Like 50% of people don't submit lists which means we don't know half of what's being played.
Yes but we don't know if the half we're missing tells a different story to the half we have. This is how sampling works. We have 50% of a population of however many players it was. 9000 I think. I can't remember. That's actually a perfectly reasonable sample. No, in fact it's very good. If I did a study of a population of thousands of people and sampled half of them that would be absolutely amazing in scientific terms. It's a really good piece of data collection. BUT, it's whether the sample is representative or not. That's what we care about. And that is what we don't know. I would tentatively suggest, but cannot prove, that the people who do submit lists are perhaps more experienced or motivated than those who do not. So maybe the obtained 50% is more competitive than the lost 50%? But I don't know. We literally cannot answer this question because we can't make statements about absentees. But it would be strange to obtain half of all the data, and then to conclude that the missing half must show completely different results. That would be a very strange statistical phenomenon. A sample of half of a large population is usually enough to be pretty sure. Anyway, coming onto what I really wanted to say.... So this video is linked to "prove" that CA is too good. (It doesn't "prove" anything, but merely strongly suggests it - and I need to be more careful of language myself). People accept this because it fits a narrative. Fine. But then a few posts later we see arguments about how vanilla is better than sectorials. And the very same video that we've taken as a source of information just a few posts up is now utterly ignored when it suggests that many sectorials are as good as vanilla factions. Because that's one of the other takeaways of the video. Vanilla factions do not seem to be wholesale better than sectorials. But this is ignored because it does NOT fit the narrative. If we want to take information from a data source (flawed as it is) then can we actually properly pay attention to the data source instead of cherry picking?
CB gave a briefing on the status of ITS and events as the year comes to a close. [Infinity Universe Studio Update] #28 - Christmas 2022 Special Edition And a view of the trophies. Post: https://www.facebook.com/Infinityth...WFkPKt4VhGiPHH6rTu8fZppo1RqZfU3jial?__tn__=-R
Index of the review of ITS Objective pack in siocast by Infinity gamer. Infinity ITS Objective pack review & assembly
Index of the review by Quiet Professional. Quiet Professional https://www.youtube.com/@quietprofessional4557 Infinity N4 | Sectorials | Trooper Considerations Part 1 | ITS Data Infinity N4 | Sectorials | Trooper Considerations Part 2 | ITS Data Infinity N4 | Sectorials | Trooper Considerations Part 3 | ITS Data
For info Goonhammer analyzed of the IGL via the White Company, here, I have created a thread if you want to make discussions https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/goonhammer-preparing-for-the-igl-satellite-with-wc.41953/ And here, their article: Preparing for the Infinity Global League Satellite with White Company - By Genghis Cohen - January 20, 2023 Spoiler: Summary Summary: What is the IGL Satellite? What is White Company? Why do I want to play them? The IGL Satellite Missions White Company Strengths Standout Units White Company Weaknesses Link: https://www.goonhammer.com/preparing-for-the-infinity-global-league-satellite-with-white-company/
