I fully expect new links, don't get me wrong. That's exactly why I would like to field something else other than ghulams for that light duty HMG.
Just wishlisting here...but what I really want to see is a Camo Sniper with more than BS11. I also wouldnt mind if it had better ammo than just shock and if it infiltrates I wont mind either, but please CB, camoed sniper with BS 12+ ? Make it cost extra SWC in Vanilla so it doesnt overshadow the other choices.
I really, really, REALLY do not want to see split costs. I already need a fifteen minute lecture to explain sectorials versus 'vanilla' when telling people about what models they can use with the particular thing they want. Much less adding in caveats about things that can't get used one way or the other.
Where is the problem? Army tells the player the same in an instant. You want a Fireteam? Play a Sect. You want Hawwas and Farzans? Play Vanilla. And Army also adds up the points for you, so where is the problem with different costs? This profile is 32/1 in a Sectorial and 32/2 in Vanilla is now now really not that hard to understand.
Because the models are supposed to be pointed valued on their capabilities and value. You are suggesting an arbitrary point shift to support a split in play. Not a difference in value.
Value changes based on what they have in a list to combo with, though. That's just an example. Besides, CB games point system left and right already. It's less about value and more about accepted conventions we've got used to.
Like all the other profiles in Infinity which have differing SWC costs between Sectorial and Vanilla? Apart from that, I still do not see the problem with that, if it prevents a unit overshadowing all the others in Vanilla. Where does that hurt anybody?
Those are, to my nowledge, story driven. Samurai don't like a pesant telling them what to do. If you have obsolescence in vanilla then you already have a mistake. Or just dispense with the notion and put 20+ factions in the same and drop any pretense.
Story driven or not, its a thing and there are little to none complaints about it. The obsolescence in Vanilla we already have, comes mostly from the Sectorials, which makes it an inherent mistake of the whole Sectorial-Vanilla system. And with even more Sectorials to come it will get worse. To prevent this its either necessary to make Sectorial only profiles or allow them in Vanilla with a tax. In my book its more desireable to be able to have choices, real choices and not a clearly best or worst.
The sectorial system is really rather odd, isn't it? They seem to mostly design for sectorials now, making vanilla a bit bloated. I wonder if the sectorials really could be split, but counted as united for narrative events and the like. Vanilla units (Ghulam, for instance) could still be shared to help give a sense of faction identity. But without doing that, even split costs won't really work. Players will just gravitate towards the most efficient / effective profiles. Artificially raising SWC doesn't create more interesting choices, it just changes the math behind the choices. Infinity is great at hiding this math because of the blackjack dice system, but it's still there.
Honestly, I don't mind it that much if units designed for sectorial are not so hot in vanilla by themselves. Sectorials are designed to be fluffy and thematic, so it makes sense if they use something that is unique, if only because it's only unique because it doesn't work outside of sectorial and nobody bothers. It's less inspiring situation if they are made suboptimal by gimping their profiles in vanilla specifically though...
