Generic vs Sectorial?

[Aisriyth]

So, when I first got into Infinity I preferred Generic lists for the versatility provided. However, as time as gone on, I find myself often favoring Sectorial lists for a very strange reason. Which is, the amount of choices and awesome models in generic lists make it INCREDIBLY difficult for me to build army lists. For me I find the restrictions on Sectorials help me actually get a list built!

Anyone else have the same issue?

P.S. For some reason I find this even more difficult in Ariadna then any other army I've owned. To the extent of even in 'generic' lists i end up using almost exclusively MRRF/Caledonian/Kazak stuff.

[Pierzasty]

Yep, I had the same problem when I was starting Infinity, so I decided to go Shasvastii It goes away when you get a feel for the units, then you just go "OK, I want a visor and some smoke, maybe an AD2 and decent flank defense", then your choice is limited to a particular role and you actually have to choose from 2-3 units most suited to the task.

[Aisriyth]

Strangely, I am having the issue more now than when I started! However, I was rolling three armies for a while since I was new and never got REALLY in depth into one until more recently, so perhaps that's why.

That has it's benefits though, two of my opponents can't surprise me since they got my ALEPH and Tohaa!

[Morze]

I prefer sectorial as I start new factions, because that way I don't have to immerse myself so much into the faction. It's like "<insert faction>, the experience- light version". It's economically more feasible, because I can limit myself to only buy those precise models in sectorial and in a way indeed help in list building. "When Merovingia gives you mainly light infantry, make a light infantry list."

[Puprednuht]

I've mostly played Vanilla up until recently. The lure of link teams and a change of play-style has been making Sectorial lists more appealing.

[SgtHulka]

I fear the power creep of Sectorial Lists. The marketing has been that you gain specific advantages from Sectorials, but you lose out on many important vanilla options. While that's true in a Sectorial like the Japanese, that's becoming less and less true in a Sectorial like Kapu Qalpi. The only things your really missing in Qapu Kalpi are Hassassin. And if you want to run them, they have their own Sectorial, anyway. Furthermore, in Kapu Qalpi you have access to not one, but two link teams.

Sectorials are shiney and exciting. It's only natural CB will come out with new figures specifically designed to make Sectorials awesomer. Unless there's a new advantage given to Vanilla, I just don't think Vanilla is going to be able to remain competitive.

[Pierzasty]

Naffatuns.

[Salty_Otter]

I fear the power creep of Sectorial Lists. The marketing has been that you gain specific advantages from Sectorials, but you lose out on many important vanilla options. While that's true in a Sectorial like the Japanese, that's becoming less and less true in a Sectorial like Kapu Qalpi. The only things your really missing in Qapu Kalpi are Hassassin. And if you want to run them, they have their own Sectorial, anyway. Furthermore, in Kapu Qalpi you have access to not one, but two link teams.

Sectorials are shiney and exciting. It's only natural CB will come out with new figures specifically designed to make Sectorials awesomer. Unless there's a new advantage given to Vanilla, I just don't think Vanilla is going to be able to remain competitive.

I totally agree. At least in my area I feel bad when I play link teams against people with vanilla lists. Maybe because they don't know how to take them on, or whatever. But it feels like a major advantage during games.

Also agree that it helps me narrow down what to actually put in my lists. Writing a vanilla list and my mind is like "I want one of these, and one of those, ooooh that's shiny! Oh snap, 2 of them guys!", but sectorial I just pin point what I like from them and play that. If I want the other stuff I play the other sectorial for a few games. Easy.

[Athanadros]

I am Vanilla all the way. I have played vanilla YJ since 2006 and have never strayed. I have tried both sectorials a handful of times but always went back to vanilla. I never use link teams and hate the rule to be honest. I think it was created to try and level the playing field so not so tactically oriented players could stand against very tactically oriented players. I don't think this is a bad thing because in the end it's about both players having fun and I am all for that.
I don't see that vanilla lists have any problems in dealing with link teams you just have to know how to handle them. I do agree though that it takes a bit of trial and error when learning how to deal with them. What I do find however is that new players gravitate directly towards link teams and I think that stifles their growth as tactical players. It is almost a crutch because they start playing using link teams exclusively and when their link team is shot to shit they have no idea how to pull themselves back into the game. On several occations I have even heard newer players say oh well my link team is dead game over. To me that is not a good rule to add to the game when people think the game is over just cuz their link team was beaten.

I'm a purist at heart though and don't even really like playing any of the other spheres. I have played all of them except Pan O (will never turn to the dark side but always feel like I am cheating on my YJ so I just stick with them.

Well theres my 2 cents...... that might have been more like a buck three eighty though.

[IJW Wartrader]

I fear the power creep of Sectorial Lists. The marketing has been that you gain specific advantages from Sectorials, but you lose out on many important vanilla options. While that's true in a Sectorial like the Japanese, that's becoming less and less true in a Sectorial like Kapu Qalpi. The only things your really missing in Qapu Kalpi are Hassassin. And if you want to run them, they have their own Sectorial, anyway. Furthermore, in Kapu Qalpi you have access to not one, but two link teams.

As both a player and a tournament organiser this is not my experience.

While I'll agree that Qapu Khalki do get a lot of shiny toys they miss out on:

Naffatuns.
Lasiqs and their viral ammo.
Impersonators.
Reliable AD troops.
Saladin.
A 'full' TAG.
TO Camo.
Naffatuns (yes, they are important enough to mention at least twice).
More than one camo unit (you'd be surprised how much of a disadvantage it can be when your opponent knows that the camo marker must be an Al Hawwa').
More than one unit that can start up the board (MechDep as well as infiltration and impersonation).
Regenerating HI.
The amazing Kum Bikers.

That's an awful lot of nice stuff and ways of playing that are excluded. Lasiqs and Naffatun are two of my favourite units in the entire game and I always feel their loss when taking Qapu Khalki.

[SgtHulka]

Fair enough, IJW, and there is no question you have a heckuva lot more experience than me. I guess my response would be that if you want to play an impersonation/AD list just go ahead and play the Hassassin sectorial. It seems to me that once you decide on the type of list you want, most of the time there's a sectorial that does that trick better than vanilla. For the moment I'm sure you're right, but I worry about what the future holds.

[IJW Wartrader]

Sure you can play Bahram if you want Impersonators, but then you lose out on all the other stuff, and it's a much longer list than for Qapu Khalki, the toolbox of Sectorials.

On the subject of Link Teams, they're one of the aspects of the game that can feel overwhelmingly powerful early on in the game but in the long run they're surprisingly well balanced.

Here's an anti-link tactica I started a while ago: http://infinitythegame.com/forum/index. ... m-tactica/

[Morze]

I think a quality of the link team decides if it's a crutch or not. I played a game a game yesterday and despite I used two different kind of links they didn't play a pivotal role, mainly because the troops were so squishy. However, I can see how full HI link team can play as a crutch like a TAG.

[Penemue]

I feel quite the opposite about generic vs sectorial. I almost never play sectorials (and when I do, it's the ISS) because they deny me the awesome combination of options I'd get in the main faction. I thought it was just the factions I play, but I see a lot of people liking Ariadna and Yu Jing sectorials. You can have your link teams; I'll take my Chasseurs and my Dog-Warrior and my Tank-Hunter and my Cateran/Wulver all in one army.

[chromedog]

I started with PanO vanilla.

I switched to Neoterrans because it allowed me to use all of the PanO models I liked and I didn't have to worry about the ones I didn't from that range.
That I get to use link teams is a bonus, but not that much as I'm usually only using a 3 man fusilier team (I'd rather take FO auxilia. Combi rifle AND heavy flamer that can shoot at two separate targets? Yes please).
I have bugger-all access to infiltrators - but I do get more TO camo models with things like spitfires, HMGs and missile launchers.
I have less access to AD troops but I don't have to worry about the Akalis - because I don't like them (the models) anyway.

MSV3 out the wazoo, baby! Booyah!

[Elfenlied]

What I do like about Sectorials is that some of them give you access to Mercs and units from other factions, which allows for a very unique blend. Miyamoto Musashi in a JSA force feels like a million bucks, and Devabots+Auxbots in the same army somehow make me happy inside.

But then again, my group uses ITS rules even for casual games, and being fluffy as well as competitive is just awesome (and not something commonly found in other war games).