by Claudius Sol » September 24th, 2014, 3:27 pm
by macfergusson » September 24th, 2014, 3:39 pm
by Claudius Sol » September 24th, 2014, 3:48 pm
by Scorch » September 24th, 2014, 3:55 pm
by FatherKnowsBest » September 24th, 2014, 4:13 pm
Scorch wrote:Thanks so much for this write up! Marvelous! Glad to hear your voice (and other voices too) thinking the necessity to push Infinity to the max order/max specialist limits is overrated.
I personally find it harmful for the game and the diversity it has to offer. Bringing a TAG is almost always bad, as his points can buy you three specialists as well. HI are 'slow', MI are 'slow', infiltration is better, etc. You can only go so many ways before you run out of options if you limit yourself to this max-out ideology.
Hope to see more of this!
by IJW Wartrader » September 24th, 2014, 4:28 pm
by macfergusson » September 24th, 2014, 4:29 pm
by IJW Wartrader » September 24th, 2014, 4:34 pm
by Scorch » September 24th, 2014, 5:02 pm
macfergusson wrote:As someone who has given advice like "maximize your orders" and "you probably shouldn't take a TAG due to how expensive it is", those are generally comments directed at very beginning newbies. These are concepts for people who are still learning mechanics and strategy in the game. It would be unfortunate if this then carries over into the general community in a "netdeck" sort of fashion, as these rules are meant to be violated once you understand the reasoning and ways in which to take advantage of them.
I think a lot of newer players are still having trouble with the idea that there is no one perfect list, and so are overly-zealous in following more generic advice. These newer players are also the same people who might have a bit less efficient order usage, maybe a little more sloppy play style. I guess what I'm saying is that this conversation may actually just be a symptom of the growth Infinity is seeing in the past year or two!
by Claudius Sol » September 24th, 2014, 5:22 pm
by Certs » September 24th, 2014, 5:32 pm
by Harlekin » September 24th, 2014, 5:43 pm
by Claudius Sol » September 24th, 2014, 5:59 pm
by Certs » September 24th, 2014, 6:10 pm
by Harlekin » September 24th, 2014, 7:18 pm
Claudius Sol wrote:The point I'm making, though, is not a focus on mobility, but rather a focus on efficiency. Remember, you don't need a lot of orders if each order you spend is spent well.
@Harelkin
I hadn't thought about the influence ITS had on my yomikata... I'll have to think on that some more and see what I come up with. I haven't played a non-ITS game outside of demos in some time. I might revisit YAMS this week and see how the readings are affected. I'll try to remember to get back to you.
by Section9 » September 24th, 2014, 9:10 pm
by WiseKensai » September 25th, 2014, 5:10 pm
by macfergusson » September 25th, 2014, 5:44 pm
WiseKensai wrote:What other model characteristics/abilities should newbie players trying to get into this style of play be paying attention to? Mobility seems to be a big part of "efficiency" and I've oft-heard that "wounds are the best stat." Thoughts?
by Scorch » September 25th, 2014, 5:46 pm
WiseKensai wrote: If you took a veteran player and handed them a 14+ model list, it seems like they would get more flexibility, not less.
by FatherKnowsBest » September 25th, 2014, 8:02 pm
by Claudius Sol » September 25th, 2014, 8:17 pm
WiseKensai wrote:What are we losing by bringing a large number of orders?
WiseKensai wrote:What does building a 10 order list get you?
by macfergusson » September 25th, 2014, 8:23 pm
Claudius Sol wrote:You lose some element of surprise. When you place down 9 models and they're all in the same combat group... Your opponent knows there is a high probability of you having AD or HD. You can also play this to your advantage and "suggest" to your opponent this way that he should cover his backfield, when there really is no need. I've played a similar trick by having two warcors in a second combat group while the primary combat group contained 9 models. My opponent was ever waiting for the Ninja Hacker. Even so much as to use Sensor+Discover on several occasions. Slightly tangent to what I'm responding to, I suppose.
by Scorch » September 25th, 2014, 10:21 pm
FatherKnowsBest wrote:I agree Scorch. I despise all the number crunching. It's all meaningless to me. I just play what I like the look of. If I'm playing ITS, I grudgingly will squeeze in a couple of specialists, but man.....do I hate having to do that. Pisses me off to no end.
by kingfrankzappa » September 26th, 2014, 12:21 pm
by Claudius Sol » September 26th, 2014, 8:30 pm
kingfrankzappa wrote:This is an awesome discussion. After the recent "less than ten, you're dead" thread on the official forum I've been trying to play with single combat group lists with my CHA as much as possible.
I kinda have to agree with the crowd that say much of order efficiency is in maneuverability. Sectorials with limited access to impetuous or forward deployment options will definitely struggle with only 10 orders.
by verysilentmouse » September 30th, 2014, 9:42 pm
by Scorch » September 30th, 2014, 10:01 pm
verysilentmouse wrote:My experience with ITS and Shock Army works best with the 14 odd with the 7 orders in each combat group. Disclaimer haven't played in an actual tournament, but my local group only plays ITS.
by Claudius Sol » October 1st, 2014, 8:51 pm