1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Private information: Cost and SWC

Discussion in 'Rules' started by WWHSD, Apr 4, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. atomicfryingpan

    atomicfryingpan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2017
    Messages:
    699
    Likes Received:
    1,289
    @meikyoushisui You being able to look at an opponents list and deduce from experience who their LT is is a skill that you've probably earned over a long period of games and there's no problem if you leverage that against your opponent? If you think you knowing that but your opponent not knowing that makes the game less fun then I dont know what to tell ya.

    I've seen this before brought up where people are like I don't want to win because my opponent made a mistake or didn't know exactly everything and I wanna win knowing that I won due to my correct decisions being better than my opponents correct decisions. What mythical games are these being played by people who never make mistakes? Also every competitive game, sport, activity has that human element where the person making the least mistakes usually wins. That's just part of the game when playing with humans and capitalizing on people's mistakes is valid and most likely ideal.

    If you guys want to play in a world where people pull up the app on their first turn and look up every possible LT to try and nuke em turn 1 then that's fine I'll play in that world but don't be upset when I start taking hidden deployed LT's and having them declare dodge on one of your last orders from halfway across the table to avoid Loss of Lt. Also I find it hilarious that those of you bringing up the Sirlin article talking about scrubs and scrub mentality were also complaining about that exact tactic of hidden deploying the LT. Comical.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  2. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    12,018
    Likes Received:
    15,302
    One of the better players in my meta can suss out the more important information from just the open information. Doesn't need external help. I think what he does is that he uses the common SWC costs and has just sufficient knowledge of unit costs to spot when there's something important missing.

    Thing is, you don't actually need to know whether the camo is a Caliban Engineer, FO or Chain of Command, you just need enough to evaluate the threat range and type of the miniature hidden. Similarly, the difference between a Rokot and a Libertos isn't all that big, you just need to remember to be suspect of the Camo-3 Markers.

    I can usually fool him with a bit of work, but I need to be tighter with what I keep hidden than against most opponents or he'll immediately see whether it's a hidden Hac Tao or an un-deployed Guijia. Since I like this kind of shell game, I've got terrible win rates against him.

    This stuff goes for almost all lists, though. You don't need perfect recall, you don't need perfect reconstructions of your opponent's list, you just need enough for threat evaluation. Trying to make it perfect and to suss out exactly what specialist is hidden under a Marker is usually a waste of time, in my opinion. I certainly don't see it when I play against the top players at least.
    Trying to address it is a red herring; I think TOs are better off addressing the social aspects. It's more important to address how someone is checking stats than that they are doing it.
     
  3. meikyoushisui

    meikyoushisui Competitor for Most Ignored User

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2017
    Messages:
    1,803
    Likes Received:
    2,804
    I wanted to write a bit about this in a previous comment, but it felt a bit too tangential. As many on these forums might already know, I speak Japanese as a second language. Reading and writing Japanese at an adult level requires you to know about 3000 Chinese characters. Each character is composed of roughly 1-15 lines and you need to know the order of the strokes as well if you want to be able to decode handwriting or get away with a more cursive style. And that's before you get into each character having several possible readings and meanings that you also need to memorize.

    It's pretty reasonable to estimate that someone learning Japanese as a second language would be able to memorize 30 or so a week with just a 30 minutes or so of study a day. And that's layers and layers more complex than memorizing one to one mappings of profile loadouts to two-digit numbers.

    Again, I think many players spend more time painting a single mini than it would take for them to memorize the point costs of all of the troopers in an entire faction.

    It's not a skill that I've earned from games though, it's a skill I've earned from poring over Army for hours and hours that was reinforced by my army decision.

    I'm always going to choose to leverage that against my opponent (even if I tried not to, I subconsciously would, because that's how brains work), but the source of my frustration here is that it's information that makes me a better player even if I have worse decision-making skills, because just knowing that can have such a big impact on the game.

    But I don't want the game to be over before it begins because I've spent more time memorizing charts than my opponent has. Whenever you introduce elements of memorization into a game, memorization as a mechanic starts to get outsized importance. (It's a lot like negotiation in that sense: if you add it to your game, it's going to take over the whole game. What would Catan be without negotiation?)

    I think there's really two types of mistakes that you're talking about here that I want to delineate.

    One type is a decision-making mistake. Those are fine and if they didn't exist the game would also not exist. If I win because my opponent makes a mistake in their decision-making, that's fine. If I beat you because I executed my strategy better than you executed yours, that's great! That game will be memorable. But the mistakes we make here will be because we made bad choices, and nothing else.

    The other type of mistake is one that is harder to pin down exactly, but I would tentatively call it a "game knowledge mistake." This would be winning or losing because of something that you could have known (either because it was open information or you could have memorized it) but did not. If you could have won the game by killing a trooper that you would have known was my Lt. if you memorized the profiles, but you didn't because you didn't know and I turn the game around on you, that victory isn't nearly as satisfying to me, because it wouldn't have been mine if we had had a level playing field in terms of knowledge about the game.

    Minimizing the latter has no effect on the space of the former at the highest level of play, but has the result of making the game more satisfying for everyone below the highest level of play.

    I was the one who brought up the Sirlin article and I haven't seen anyone complaining about HD lieutenants since I mentioned it... I would be grateful if you could link to one of these complaints.

    I for one would love if this led to meta decisions like taking HD lieutenants! That would give them a real role beyond being CoC bait (JSA) or terrible choices that no one should ever take. I am all for the continued presence of private information in the game, and I'm by no means arguing that the game needs to be some kind of perfect information combinatorial game. If I wanted that, I would go back to chess.
     
  4. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    2,533
    Issues about preventing the use of Army.

    (Know that these issues are raised by preventing the use of Army as a rule. You can always have table etiquette and what not by discussing withy our opponent before the game starts based on your preferences, Infinity is a collaborative game)

    - - - - -

    Inequal footing between inexperienced and veteran player based on faction knowledge. Knowledge that is openly available between games (in the event that you prevent it), knowledge based purely on memory and experience. Opens the door to "gotchas" based on your opponent playing around things you -cannot- have, or not playing around things you -can- have because they don't know it exists.
    In a casual setting: Seems pretty poor to me.
    In a tournament setting: This is a personal opinion (I think it's a skill that has absolutely nothing worth testing on, it incentivise people to trivia informations before the game starts, I personally have no interest in winning a game simply because my opponent is inexperienced)

    - - - - -

    Preventing the use of army creates more uncertainty in your lists. This kinda hinges on the previous point, where that will be based on your opponent's experience, so the same conclusion can be reached imo. But you're basing that uncertainty on the fact that your opponent is less experienced, rather than using the tools you have when building a list to hide that information yourself (holo, camo, HD, AD, decoy, fake LTs). Some factions also have obvious LT as a weakness, and that's okay.
    In a casual setting: Same conclusion as before imo.
    In a tournament setting: This is a personal opinion (If your strategy is hoping your opponent will not be able to figure out your obvious LT in a list with a single possible LT, it's a trash strategy)

    - - - - -

    Opens the door to unsportsmanship behaviour. Right now, from what I could gather by the tons of conversations flying around, everyone seems to be willingly giving away any information that someone could look out through Army. Questions such as "Does your faction have acces to X skill", "Does Y trooper have a Lieutenant profile?", etc. Preventing the use of army makes it so there would be competitive incentive to reject answering those questions.
    In a casual setting: This is completely outrageous.
    In a tournament setting: This seems terrible, Infinity is a game that hinges a lot on collaboration and creaturing rules that incentivise the opposite seems terrible for the game.

    - - - - -

    It creates window where actual private information leaks. In the event that the players decide to still collaborate (see previous case). When asking a player "does your faction have acces to X skill", if they are inexperienced, they will often hesitate if they do not have any in their list while they recall if their faction has acces to them. And if they do have some in their list, they're likely to promptly answer. This gives the asking reveals private tells that they shouldn't have access to.
    In a casual setting: People help out and talk to each other, it's casual, seems whatever here. I don't think people will try to prey on casual players to get tells in a casual settings, lol.
    In a tournament setting: Getting tells based on the fact that your opponent wants to collaborate doesn't seem like a great thing, if both player can simply glance at army to answer their questions while the opponent is deploying then that issue simply doesn't exist. It also has the benefit of letting not letting your opponent know what you plan on playing around.

    - - - - -

    It is nightmare to enforce. Whether you want to completely remove the use of Army or restrict the use of Army to simply looking up profiles (impossible to enforce them not seeing points) it becomes a nightmare to enforce. People have their phone, look up rules, policing what they're actually looking at seems like a nightmare. Not only that, but with a lot of event being digital right now, it's completely silly to expect any kind of enforcement on this level.
    In a causal setting: You can just talk with your opponent and figure out how you want to play the game, it doesn't really apply.
    In a tournament setting: It's a total nightmare to enforce, simply letting everyone be able to have access to any game ressources is so much easier. (Especially with all the other issues listed before that rises)
     
  5. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    So if I have a 32 point hole in my list, an opponent might be able to deduce that in OCF I have a ML Noctifer and not a Spitfire Fraacta, since the Spitfire Fraacta costs 33 points. Why would you not be mad if someone deduced that through an encyclopedic knowledge of points costs, but mad if they used Army? What about a calculator?

    It honestly sounds like you're mad that the information in question can be deduced at all, but you know that you can't ban using your brain. I think the overall motive for making this information needlessly obfuscated is questionable.
     
  6. psychoticstorm

    psychoticstorm Aleph's rogue child
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2017
    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    11,257
    Should we assume this discussion concluded at least as far as the rules question is concerned?
     
  7. WWHSD

    WWHSD Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    79
    Unless ijw feels like poking in his head and adding his two cents, yes.
     
  8. kinginyellow

    kinginyellow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    630
    From a competitive scene the answer atleast in a large portion of the United States dire states that I have been to in n3 is that it is frowned upon to entirely banned to do it. So it is extremely easy for the competitive scene to not allow this as almost all of n3 that I have been playing, this was not something you did.

    Locations include Florida, Washington D.C, Chicago, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico and Colorado.

    I have never played a competitive game against a person who i knowingly saw him recreate my list in army. I have seen a person end up with a loss due to pushing to know the stats of a sphinx (s6 To camo in ca is not a hard guess on what it was) that hasn't revealed itself.

    And when would someone even have time to be able to enter in an opponents list into army? While I am deploying all but one model on the table without having yet given my courtesy list and have yet to go over all my model's public information? Are we realistically expecting a player to have memorized the entire model range of the opposing faction, including what a model could realistically look like due to cb's policy to proxies and conversions. That way as I deploy he can enter in what I put down.

    of course not, but people are not going to keep answering what they are placing down until they are done with deployment. Or are we expecting the person to do it while they are actively playing the game? Or are we supposed to take time after deploying to enter the opponents models into army. But people keep advocating to not tie up the game entering into army, and that would be the opposite of that.

    So you all may have an opinion about it being legal or not, but there is not a realistic time for a new player to build the list without a massive time sink and having read the absolute vitriol from T.O's who run massive u.s. tourneys, this will still be "house ruled" against it in portions of the u.s.

    This feels like you are arguing that you all want to be able to super jump up and shoot a target in the back due to geometry, before cb even explicitly said that is how it was played.

    And hilariously that conversation never actually happened in any of the tourneys I played either during that ruling.
     
  9. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    2,533
    This shows that you did not spend a single second to read any of the comments.

    Also, the Super-Jump debate was not CB coming in to explicitely say how it was played, it was CB fixing the interaction because it was a fundamental flaw in the rules. They added a massive FAQ entry and new rules to make sure this was fixed.

    As for the game time, this is an independant question and a experienced player can absolutely use Army in an amount of time that doesn't impact the flow of the game during their opponent's deployment.

    In my opinion, preventing the use of game ressources in a competitive setting (let alone a casual setting) is an actual joke to anybody who would consider approaching a game competitively. (I've never seen this in any other serious competitive games)
     
    DaRedOne, RobertShepherd and Hecaton like this.
  10. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Without commenting on the general question, the model's information is public as soon as you deploy it. It's buried earlier in the thread (or possibly in a previous one), but that's literally the description for how to do it without slowing down the game.
     
    RobertShepherd and Diphoration like this.
  11. the huanglong

    the huanglong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2017
    Messages:
    2,023
    Likes Received:
    3,657
    As in they were punished for asking the stats of a sphinx because they suspected the enemy had a sphinx?
     
    meikyoushisui and Hecaton like this.
  12. WWHSD

    WWHSD Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    79
    Just in case it has been buried in 9 pages of tangent, the question that I’m looking to get answered is what is meant by the line “Your Trooper’s Cost and SWC” in the Private Information Section.

    Is it:

    A. The Cost and SWC information of the specific Trooper that as been deployed (or is otherwise in your army list).

    B. General Cost and SWC information that would cover all profiles in the game (even if though it is possible that Troopers in the game may utilize those same profiles).

    C. Something else.

    Based on the feedback on the thread that actually addressed the question that was asked, I’m pretty sure that the answer is A. Granted, I’m a bit biased as I’ve thought the answer was A. since the first time I read the Private Information rules section.
     
    Diphoration likes this.
  13. QueensGambit

    QueensGambit Chickenbot herder

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2019
    Messages:
    2,213
    Likes Received:
    3,456
    Hmm. If, each time I put down a model during my deployment, my opponent asked me what it was, that would definitely slow down my deployment considerably.

    I suppose I could line up my models (other than my reserve) and tell my opponent what they all are first, then deploy them. That would be faster.

    But, since deployment doesn't happen in any particular order (with limited exceptions), I've always assumed that none of my models are deployed until I've decided their final positions. When I put a model on the table partway through deployment, it's only marking a hypothetical position. So I've always assumed that I don't have to give my opponent the rundown until I've finished deploying. That said, it's never come up since nobody has ever asked me to do it sooner.
     
    Methuselah likes this.
  14. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    I've experienced a mix - some players go over it once everything is placed, others say as they place the model. It can be as basic as 'Alguacile with HMG, Camo marker, Interventor Killer Hacker' as they're going down.
     
    Diphoration likes this.
  15. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    2,533
    It's almost as if it's clear to both players, it's fine. :upside_down_face:
     
    Nuada Airgetlam likes this.
  16. kinginyellow

    kinginyellow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2017
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    630
    A model cannot be deployed once it has touched the table during the deployment phase. Because if so, there are no rules for redeployment a model and that would mean once a model is down, its down. I have never played against anyone playing that a model cannot be adjusted while they are finding a spot for every model. Instead everyone plays it (that i have seen) that you put all but one down in any order. And then all the models are officially deployed.

    The alternative means not only does it change to once its down, it also means you know about every minelayer in the game as they must be deployed together unlike 2 regular camo models.

    Note I am excluding combat jump, metachemistry, and booty from this.
     
  17. ijw

    ijw Ian Wood aka the Wargaming Trader. Rules & Wiki
    Infinity Rules Staff Warcor

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,331
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Which makes absolutely no difference for saying 'Alguacile with HMG, Camo marker, Interventor Killer Hacker' as you put down the models.

    Yes?
     
  18. Diphoration

    Diphoration Well-Known Member
    Warcor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    2,533
    While we have people arguing the rulings of actual staff members in another thread, I'm going to assume that a lot of people are not going to be satisfied with the answer given by other community members. :upside_down_face:
     
    meikyoushisui, WWHSD and Cthulhu363 like this.
  19. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    6,535
    That TO should have been sacked. The fact that there's a bunch of cliquey WarCors who think it should be illegal to look at your phone during play doesn't mean it isn't a hilariously stupid idea.
     
  20. colbrook

    colbrook Grenade Delivery Specialist

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    9,294
    Likes Received:
    17,066
    That's not exclusive of telling your opponent what they are during deployment though.

    You can tell your opponent that Nourkias is Nourkias as soon as he hits the table, even if you decide that Nourkias should be on the left flank instead of the right, you can still tell your opponent (or they can ask) who he is as soon as he's on the table without giving anything away.

    Edit: You could even pass your opponent your courtesy list and show all your openly deployed troopers on a tournament tray, going through which is which, before you start placing models on the board, and it wouldn't make any difference.
    Edit 2: Apart from the reserve, that would usually show on a courtesy list, good point me.
     
    #180 colbrook, Apr 7, 2021
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  • About Us

    We are a company founded in 2001 in Cangas (Spain), and devoted to design and manufacture games and figures. Our main product, Infinity the Game, was born with the ambition to satisfy the most demanding audience, offering the best quality.

     

    Why are we here?

     

    Because we are, first and foremost, players.

  • Quick Navigation

    Open the Quick Navigation