Discussion in 'News' started by Ayadan, Apr 11, 2019.
If anything hex bases would be totally fitting in this game of hex's
Indeed. Dovige makes some snazzy hex bases for A!
Hex or square bases would make obsessive mm los differences easier. Although I think it would lead to measure from the back of the base. I do think round bases look be the though. I hate aos but man switching from square to round bases made a lot of models look really cool.
Maybe a circular base with a flat back that gives best of both worlds? I mean it could work. Hex just feels unnecessary when only 1 side matters for los measuring.
Hex bases would also make BtB a little clunky. Circles are really nice for how they can easily touch a wide variety of shapes at only a single point.
That's a fair point. Both bases have advantages. The biggest one in favor of round bases being that Infinity currently uses them. But Hex bases would make the argument to move to a hex grid battlefield that much more acceptable to those against it. Even CB must see the advantages. They use this grid in Aristeia. I assume they'll use a similar grid for their dungeon crawler, Defiance, as well.
If only I could come up with a good way to combine a hex grid and silhouette sizes. Do other games have anything similar? I've been dying to create a large tabletop based on a hex grid but such a big investment needs the proper planning upfront.
Mechwarrior and Galaxy Defenders come to mind as starting points for ideas. Maybe.
For infinity and the millimetre movement, hex grid would not really offer much of an advantage except that it's a fucking awesome design aesthetic. I can imagine, however, that having control zones defined by the hex grid would be an interesting take on things and it could offer some more granularity and slightly more random deployment conditions if your DZ was the rear grids instead of the rear 12".
Making the switch from the current round bases to hex bases and from current rectangular boards to hex boards would be a community destroying PITA, though :(
I can see in my mind's eye how an acrylic adapter would be possible to make if S2 changed to 25mm AF (across flat) hex, and could make the model look very neat.
I think grids have potential, and I'm actually going to be playing some non-Infinity wargames on a hex grid mat in order to make them more enjoyable for a friend who gets put off by the free-form tape measure movement many of them rely on. We're definitely going to be having to do some on-the-fly rules recalibration, though.
There are interesting conversations to be had about wargames, their accessibility, and the future of the hobby. A lot of the time it seems like there's a relatively closed set of wargamers, and different games are just pushing and pulling the same pool of players between them. There aren't necessarily a lot of break-out hits that significantly grow the market, and stuff that does tends to get sidelined and looked down upon by "core wargamers". There are a lot of parallels with video games and the "core" vs "casual" demographics, where "core" games are now a tiny fraction of the total market share, but the members of that group can't always see that history has passed them by. I don't want to see the same thing happen to minis games any more than it already has.
We got silhouette tools, I can imagine a small rectangle with half circle cut in the side, and line marking the tangent. Maybe even some kind of weird polygon with even less than half circle cut in each side (or even all sides curved, no straigh zones), enough for all base sizes in one single part.
No need of rebasing, and even less of custom bases.
A disadvantage of the grid table is that most buildings will actually cut across an hex.
At that point, how do you consider the occupied hex?
If I wanted to play D&D on a hex grid with guns, I'd play D20 Future on a hex grid. Instead, I'm here to play a table top war-game where movement is much more open intended and relies on measurements and some nuance.
I thought "we" were against pre-measuring.
We create a new standard. Terrain is built within the limits of the hex grid. We then make allowances for existing terrain. Eventually, the game will have evolved to the point this isn't an issue.
If you're against a hex grid, come up with reasons why the current system is better. Reasons that don't include, you like it better, you hate change, or you think evolution sucks.
Otherwise, nothing in Infinity or any other game would ever change. Because for every possible change you can think of, the response can be, I'd play a different game if I wanted that.
Change is hard, i get it. Many people are content and don't want to do anything different. They put so much effort into fighting change it astonishes me. But if change didn't happen... we'd never be where we all are today. So if you like where we are now, I'd suggest getting on board with change and enjoy wherever it takes us.
I can’t speak for others, but since I mentioned my particular plans...
In my particular case we’re trying something different because the freeform movement has been a struggle for a friend who wants to like minis games but can never quite get into them. Games will sometimes be decided by 1mm of range, despite the fact that it’s physically impossible to consistently measure and move with that degree of accuracy. Any time you move a model you are potentially cheating by moving 6.1” instead of 6”. Any time you bump the table, you irreversibly alter the game state. Etc. So we’re going to try a more discrete, more knowable form of wargaming and see how that feels.
I think that no premeasuring is one of the worst aspects of infinity. It adds nothing interesting to the game, and unnecessarily complicated several core mechanics. I think maneuvering around terrain to get a good angle is interesting, and is the kind of gameplay we should be encouraging. Good rules are the ones that make you look at the same board from new angles. Conversely, I think that missing a shot because you were 0.25” out of range is uninteresting; your ability to perfectly eyeball distances is not something I care about testing and training.
As for core mechanics - right now we are stuck with confusing rules with no clear resolution where sometimes instead of deciding what reaction you want to take, you have to guess if you are allowed to react at all. Again, I think that being able to accurately estimate if you crossed an imaginary 8” bubble is an uninteresting skill. I want you to know where the ZoC boundaries are, so that I can see what clever plans you are able to come up with given that information.
In short, I think that Infinity with premeasuring would be more tactical and would reward better gameplay instead of the ability to accurately estimate ranges.
Given all of the current situations where you’re required and/or forced to measure zone of control for coherency, I don’t see how “measure your ZoC to see if you have an ARO” can be avoided in the next rules revision. Then again, I’d bet for mines to go back to optional triggering, too.
Disclaimer: 4 out of 5 modern Ascension Projects have pre-measuring. Ask the El about pre-measuring today.
CB is, and it doesn't seem to matter how many of us still play their game if we don't like the lack of pre-measuring.
Or we could, you know, play with pre-measuring if we want to and not care one bit what CB thinks about the issue.
It's amazing how well this works as long as both players are in on it, though it does shift who has the advantage for some interactions.
Premeasuring gives advantage to the active player and (supposedly, depending on player and analysis paralysis) increases play time, I would be interested in hearing your opinions and more importantly experiences on how much advantage the first player gains and how much play time is increased, but on another tread.
Hexagons are fun, but the practical logistics of not needing to sell to the customers a 4x4 hexgrid playmat and force them to either buy a transparent acrylic hex play mats or not use their existing terrain collection to simply play the game, is from a company viewpoint a very good reason why hexagonal map dependant game mechanics are not that good, for a wargame.
Boardgames on the other hand
I think the most common mistake when it comes to pre-measuring in Infinity is to be able to pre-measure ZoC. I've seen a lot of people who spontaneously measure ZoC to check if they have AROs and take this for granted.
Again, this works just fine if both players are in on it, but it does make ZoC-significant attacks much better, and I'd argue to the point where attacks and combinations where ZoC becomes more potent needs to be shifted upwards in points.
HMG, for example, gains a small advantage so you know when to use Pistol.
Hacking, Jammers and small teardrops gain a notable advantage because it's very easy to know when you're out of range.
Combinations such as Rifle+Light Shotgun gains a significant advantage because you will be able to know which of two significant weapons to use.
Combi Rifles gain a disadvantage because the ZoC measuring never really becomes relevant.