Silhouette sizes revealed

[Harlekin]

Except that I don't see the issues you've raised as being substantial problems.

You probably don't.
And I just hope that all my worries are just that: worries - and that those never ever grow any substance.

About everything else, I simply feel sorry for you about having to play with (or better against) so many dorks

[IJW Wartrader]

Could you please stop with the insults? Players don't need to be dorks to have issues with Infinity's LoF rules or to come up with situations that are very hard to resolve under current rules.

[Harlekin]

Seems like there's a different point of view: I only ever had trouble with people (even about LOF) when those are dorks (or we just don't get along pretty well - in which case it might be me being a dork).
And with those people the "very hard to resolve" thing will just stay, no matter the rules.
And I'll probably continue to call every player trying to play _against_ me with grim determination in every aspect instead of trying to enjoy a game together with all the other participants a "dork" - most probably not personally but he'll surely fall into this category for me.
Of course, I might be considered a dork for some people for being not "competitive" or for lacking the grim determination of giving my opponent really hard times - but I can stand that and that's fine with me.

But to keep things more polite, in the future I wont use this word anymore but "unhappy gamer" instead.

[IJW Wartrader]

Yes, a very different point of view.

The 2nd edition LoF rules are loose enough that there are multiple valid interpretations of how certain situations should be played. If those loose areas come up in a game you've basically got a choice of trying to find a solution in the rules, agreeing on a house rule or agreeing on a new decision each time it comes up.

None of those solutions make players dorks, competitive or even unhappy.

[Harlekin]

Rules are put down using language. Language (almost) ever is biunique, so there will always be room for interpretation and everything simply boils down to wether both (or more) players do their best to come together or not.
Hence my point of view of it being a "human" problem and not really one of the rules (which probably will stay rather un-boardgamey aka "not tight" with N3 as Infinity is a very complex game).

[macfergusson]

Rules are put down using language. Language (almost) ever is biunique, so there will always be room for interpretation and everything simply boils down to wether both (or more) players do their best to come together or not.
Hence my point of view of it being a "human" problem and not really one of the rules (which probably will stay rather un-boardgamey aka "not tight" with N3 as Infinity is a very complex game).

Proper technical writing removes the need for interpreting. Entire careers are based on this fact.

CB is apparently finally considering this and attempting to write out a sound rules mechanic text.

Two friendly, reasonable people can read N2 rules as entirely different interpretations, and that is a sign of poorly written rules text.

[Harlekin]

Indeed. Entire careers are based on this fact. A whole industrie is: Jurisprudence - with all their millions of bright and highly specialized and qualified minds involved. And still we need judges and tons of lawyers to solve things.
CB is doing their best but they will most probably fail. Even Fantasy Flight has to put out FAQs and Erratas and their games are far from as complex as Infinity is.

Two friendly, reasonable people can read N2 and come to different interpretations which makes them have a look at the wiki and FAQs (about twice the volume of the actual rules) and even then might have to talk to each other to find a solution for their particular problem. If they are friendly and reasonable, there won't be any problem at any time.

Still, you're absolutely right about N2 not being the best example for a good set of rules for a game.

[Hordshyrd]

Sorry to try to re-rail the thread here, but looking at these silhouettes, I can't help but wonder how their going to effect the prone rules. Will it still be based on the base or will it be something more along the lines of laying the silhouette down or only using part of it.

[Spacefrog]

What is the big difference between using a silhouette and "replace with a model with normal pose"?

Personally I love the silhouettes, it does make things easier, to have a standardized system.

[Claudius Sol]

I think prone will just be the base, as always. It's pretty easy to use.

The only difference between silhouettes and the normal pose model replacement is a standardization across factions.

[Todd]

Rules are put down using language. Language (almost) ever is biunique, so there will always be room for interpretation and everything simply boils down to wether both (or more) players do their best to come together or not.
Hence my point of view of it being a "human" problem and not really one of the rules (which probably will stay rather un-boardgamey aka "not tight" with N3 as Infinity is a very complex game).

Considering that currently many players intentionally use LoF rules that are different from those in the rulebook/wiki, I don't see where interpretation or coming to an agreement really come into play. My hopes are that silhouettes and the rest of N3's LoF rules will not only be interpreted clearly by all players, but will also be universally attractive to all players, so that we're finally all using the same LoF rules.

I come to an agreement every single time I play someone from a different meta (I use whatever LoF method they're comfortable with), and honestly, I'm fucking tired of it. So, no, it has nothing to do with players being dorks, it's about the game having crap LoF rules, and finally having them addressed.

[M2Cat]

Silhouettes are more convenient than replacement with standard model. Some players are strict "mm-lawyers" and replacing a model with another one and backwards you can (un)intentionally run into unnecessary and senseless hassle. With silhouette you just place it near the model's base perpendicular to LOS in question and try to see it. The miniature stays untouched.
Plus revealed silhouettes from Warsenal have horizontal and vertical lines to help you determine whether the terrain is high/wide enough to claim bonus from cover.

[Todd]

Silhouettes are more convenient than replacement with standard model. Some players are strict "mm-lawyers" and replacing a model with another one and backwards you can (un)intentionally run into unnecessary and senseless hassle. With silhouette you just place it near the model's base perpendicular to LOS in question and try to see it. The miniature stays untouched.
Plus revealed silhouettes from Warsenal have horizontal and vertical lines to help you determine whether the terrain is high/wide enough to claim bonus from cover.

I don't get how "mm-lawyers" is a significant issue when we have much bigger problems, like a LoF system that changes the ability of a model to receive cover based on what direction the sculpt is facing. That's the kind of stuff that I'm happy to have silhouettes fix.

[Mob of Blondes]

Oh, BTW, Suppression changes was also given away around February, by another partner.



Check the compartment near the top right.

[M2Cat]

I think that out doesn't matter where you place Suppression Fire marker. Rules state clearly that SF corridor is a straight stripe ending between long and extreme ranges of weapon and having width equal 2 inches. I doubt that would change in N2.
Markers present in the box just show clearly what miniature is the source of SF.

[Errhile]

Actually - we know that for sure already - Supressive Fire will be very different in N3.

It will become a "weapon" (or rather, attack mode available to some weapons only. Good idea, IMHO, there's little sense in making a Shotgun do a SF) firing with Burst 3 and up to 24" at best (and that's with -3 already, IIRC), and weapon's original Damage.

It will, however, affect the entire frontal hemisphere of a model. Yes, you read it right, 180-degree arc.

Check the BoW Infinity N3 Week - weapons and ammo part.

[M2Cat]

Cool.
Haven't seen BoW videos cause I prefer to play Infinity rather watching about it.
So, SF becomes more an "overwatch stance" like in other (in)famous games?

[Errhile]

Then check the summary the guys have posted on the DS blog
As for the "overwatch stance", I can't say either way - haven't played that other games you mention.

[Section9]

Actually - we know that for sure already - Supressive Fire will be very different in N3.

It will become a "weapon" (or rather, attack mode available to some weapons only. Good idea, IMHO, there's little sense in making a Shotgun do a SF) firing with Burst 3 and up to 24" at best (and that's with -3 already, IIRC), and weapon's original Damage.

It will, however, affect the entire frontal hemisphere of a model. Yes, you read it right, 180-degree arc.

Check the BoW Infinity N3 Week - weapons and ammo part.

Ick. DO NOT LIKE that rule. Suppression fire does not work that way...

[Mob of Blondes]

This marker is clearly designed for the 180deg concept. N2 markers required no half circle cut off, as they mark the end of a corridor. Even the picture in the shop shows it N3 style. And worse, just noticed they started to sell it near a year ago, and people pointed the "problem".



As for rules, I wonder if the BS mods are accumulative with the weapon ones, or replace them completly.

[macfergusson]

Actually - we know that for sure already - Supressive Fire will be very different in N3.

It will become a "weapon" (or rather, attack mode available to some weapons only. Good idea, IMHO, there's little sense in making a Shotgun do a SF) firing with Burst 3 and up to 24" at best (and that's with -3 already, IIRC), and weapon's original Damage.

It will, however, affect the entire frontal hemisphere of a model. Yes, you read it right, 180-degree arc.

Check the BoW Infinity N3 Week - weapons and ammo part.

Ick. DO NOT LIKE that rule. Suppression fire does not work that way...

I think it will actually work better in N3. You aren't limited to a specific corridor that you can accidentally shoot your ally with, but it has penalties that make it a choice, not just a given every time you want to Shoot in active turn and don't have a Move to go with it.

Additionally, something I haven't seen mentioned yet, but the attacker of the model using Supression Fire has to take a -3 penalty as well, unless that was changed. I think it will balance out nicely.

[schoon]

A brief regression back to the OP - anyone know when the silhouette markers might make another appearance for purchase?

[Section9]

A brief regression back to the OP - anyone know when the silhouette markers might make another appearance for purchase?

Probably just in time to buy with Christmas money.

[Lampyridae]

Actually - we know that for sure already - Supressive Fire will be very different in N3.

It will become a "weapon" (or rather, attack mode available to some weapons only. Good idea, IMHO, there's little sense in making a Shotgun do a SF) firing with Burst 3 and up to 24" at best (and that's with -3 already, IIRC), and weapon's original Damage.

It will, however, affect the entire frontal hemisphere of a model. Yes, you read it right, 180-degree arc.

Check the BoW Infinity N3 Week - weapons and ammo part.

Ick. DO NOT LIKE that rule. Suppression fire does not work that way...

I think it will actually work better in N3. You aren't limited to a specific corridor that you can accidentally shoot your ally with, but it has penalties that make it a choice, not just a given every time you want to Shoot in active turn and don't have a Move to go with it.

Additionally, something I haven't seen mentioned yet, but the attacker of the model using Supression Fire has to take a -3 penalty as well, unless that was changed. I think it will balance out nicely.

In theory your infantryman knows roughly where the enemy is at all times (other than camo markers).

In "real life," you don't snatch up your Heavy Rocket Launcher and twist 90 degrees to pop a shot at a Lasiq's leg glimpsed through a half open door a kilometre away. Because that's how ARO works and it's whack. It's better to say that ARO fire is suppressive fire for heavy weapons - it's banging away at all the places where it looks like somebody's going to pop out and 99% of the shots are wasted.

Not quite how it works but hey. Measuring beaten zones in an urban skirmish game is a drag. There are simulation games out there, but Infinity isn't one of them.

[WookieeGunner]

The official statement from Warsenal is that they are not allowed to sell the silhouettes until N3 is released so as soon as you see the N3 rulebook on your FLGS's shelf you can log into their Wi-Fi and order the silhouettes.

[schoon]

This marker is clearly designed for the 180deg concept. N2 markers required no half circle cut off, as they mark the end of a corridor. Even the picture in the shop shows it N3 style. And worse, just noticed they started to sell it near a year ago, and people pointed the "problem".

I'm not so sure about that - the marker could be designed for 90 degrees or 180 degrees, and 90 makes more sense to me.

The "rest" of the marker could simply be a manufacturing constraint.

[macfergusson]

This marker is clearly designed for the 180deg concept. N2 markers required no half circle cut off, as they mark the end of a corridor. Even the picture in the shop shows it N3 style. And worse, just noticed they started to sell it near a year ago, and people pointed the "problem".

I'm not so sure about that - the marker could be designed for 90 degrees or 180 degrees, and 90 makes more sense to me.

The "rest" of the marker could simply be a manufacturing constraint.

It's an exact 180 degree line fitted along a miniature base, which just happens to coincide with how we define facing in the game. Does that really seem like a coincidence to you?

Besides which, we're not guessing about the new Suppression Fire, it is one of the things Bostria has revealed about N3 already.

[IJW Wartrader]

Given that it would be useless for showing 180° arcs (which is nothing specific to Suppressive Fire as far as I'm aware) for 40mm or 55mm bases, I'm going to go with CM thinking it was a neat twist on the N2 marker.

As SF is a state of the model in N3 there's no reason for a 2" marker, it would be a round token like all the other status tokens.

[Mob of Blondes]

Or a double purpose marker, N2 and N3 compatible marker. Because the issue with 40 and 55 is there for all the other "hughers" they sell, and they solved it by making versions for all the 3 sizes. Or maybe they were lucky and the fuck up is now an advantage.

I think double purpose is neater than "your marker is now useless", by far, even if by pure luck (coincidence) instead of being warned in advance or being suppliers for beta testing or ... (active planning). All the contrary to the circular templase that you can use as smoke, mono or similar... remembering the size difference... or just throw and use some new cardboard.

[Section9]

I somehow suspect someone decided to see if the suppression fire markers would sell if they were made from "scrap" acrylic that had already been used to cut some round markers from.