What’s wrong with Infinity Reinforcements - and how to fix them!

[@ethaneberle9258]

I love how you thought out changes that would make the game mode more cinematic and Infinity-esque. I would love to give these changes a shot and be able to provide play-tested experience. Thank you for your time and thoughts on this!

[@afterhoursrd6946]

I know I’m super late to this train but I would love to see this version of reinforcement on the table top!!

[@thedicegodswg]

Haha well, Late or not, appreciate you watching. Well, we know that N5 is bringing changes, so let's see what happens there. Then maybe we'll codify these rules and make them available!

[@reecedignan8365]

My suggestion would be a few things: 1. Big one is to make the reinforcements choice a player one. I.e. a player can choose to have a reserve force or he can choose not to. So you could have 1 player who’s running his full list base down while his opponent has such a reinforcement push. 2. I’d make reinforcements into a choice also. You can have them be a dropped call in - limits you to 5 models and 25% of your force list being able to be made into reinforcements. Befit however is its rapid and dynamic entry. A player using a dropped can deploy it in turn 1 on a successful WIL roll by his comlink trooper, but is limited to his own deployment zone. A player can choose to drop it in turn 2 however a successful WIL pass means being able to instead drop it in your every deployment zone (tho each increment of deepened imposes a penalty on the WIP test - I.e. you say it can go 6 inches in fine. 12” in then it’s +3, 18” +6, etc. Tho it can be deployed in friendly territory for free. On drop i actually like your idea of the ARO rush out, however id modify it slightly. You place your marker down and any enemy model caught within 4-6” of its landing cannot ARO without a successful PH test, representing the complete surprise and shock of such a close encounter/landing. While those outside of said distance can happily react as normal. This can incentive players to actually both deploy these guys safely but also boldly - so faction with more close quarters reinforcements can actually get these units a fair shake for getting stuck in, and even sometimes might be a strategy for players to load it out with strategic asset models who on close landing beside objectives can avoid the ARO due to the dynamic landings allowing them that cover to rush the objective. 2.5. The other alternative to dropped reinforcements is quick landing forces. These represent reinforcements that are deployed in a rapid insertion aircraft that won’t deploy into table but off it. In this case the model limit is increased to a full combat group being able to be taken with up to 50% of a forced pts being allowed to be used. Unlike droppods that can land dynamically amongst an enemies lines, the landing force is instead restricted to board edges, tho a changing one depending on turn. On turn 1 the player can at anytime decade his reinforcements to be arriving. They are immediately deployed on his board edge and can make a double move but nothing else - representing them just rapidly sprinting onto the battlefield due to the unforeseen need. In turn 2 a player must decade at the very start of their turn these troops are arriving. They may then now deploy them on one of the connecting sude board edges to his own. These troops get a simple 4 inch dynamic rush into the board and will immediately start generating orders for their combat group. To note if a player wish to deploy into the enemy’s deployment zone they can do so up to 6” basic. However any push deeper and it becomes a WIL test based on the models deploying so deep with modifiers like the dropped Turn 3 the reinforcements must again be declared at the very beginning however can be deployed starting from your opponent board edge. And like above they get their 4” deployment “move” and then immediately start generating orders to begin acting within their combat group. To note above, yes all these moves onto the board do draw AROs. Yes you are essentially getting to flank and enemy and even act on said flank with orders. However. You’re still dropping yourself into the hell of your enemy back lines meaning you best be prepared to face rank a few ARO responses. But this also sets up a bit of risk management for the receiving player too, as they know in turn 2 you may have to defend your flanks with observers from potential reinforcements coming in from then. And in turn 3 even having to worry about a rear line strike. 3. Give full access to lists as reinforcements or make it that you can have those reinforcements be from another sectorial however are limited to AVB of 2 max per unit from their lists. This can allow a player to include units he owns but may not get much use out of due to not being able to use them in certain sectorials outside of just going planes basic. But it does stop em just spamming cheap sectoral army units too with the limit of escape being lowered down.

[@thedicegodswg]

Blimey, you have a lot of thoughts! My one concern about reinforcements is that you have too many options, too many gotchas. It's a risk that will make another barrier to entry for newbies plus lead to negative experiences for players. I've seen 1 suggested several times. But I am not sure about it as an idea. If you take that as a build against an experienced player with an Alpha Strike list, then you could be in a massive amount of trouble turn 1. 2, similar to the above. 2.5 being able to roll in a tactical block of troops is going to make hidden deployment troopers deadly. If you walk on your group of troopers from a board edge and then, pop, cutter/ noctifer ML etc. etc. You're in real trouble, real quick. 3 I really don't think being able to bring any trooper is a good idea. There's way too much option for abuse there, I think. Plus you're going to have a lot more exceptions to the game. Do camo units retain camo? At the moment, not if in reinforcements, so then you need new profiles/ points for all of those. So we get rule and profile bloat. THAT SAID, I'd recommend you give your ideas a playtest. See how they work in the wild. :)

[@weihaigoh9734]

Cool i just found this channel in Infinity group. Very useful video just like I like watching auspex tactic video about warhammer.

[@thedicegodswg]

Blimey, that's high praise indeed. Thanks so much and welcome to the channel.

[@De_goede_Brem]

Good ideas! Might play with these rules soon!

[@thedicegodswg]

Let us know how you get on!

[@dave4deputyZX]

Yeah i think a problem is the very restricted numbers of units you can bring in reinforcements. It can make building a list very tricky. Part of the problem is the shortage of cheap line troops.

[@thedicegodswg]

It doesn't help with some factions, for sure.

[@DeepGreenX]

I think the Reinforcements rule has potential but does need a lot of work to make it a viable option for players to use. One of the main issues at the moment is that there's no option to play a Reinforcement list against a non-reinforcement list which is something that would add tactical depth to games. Personally I'd make some of the changes you suggest however I'd alter the following: Reinforcement units drop at the start of your 1st turn if you have lost 100 points of your army list OR automatically at he start of your 2nd turn. This means a player who goes 2nd and gets hammered by their opponent can still get a decent 1st turn with the addition of their reinforcements to their army, which is sort of how the mode is supposed to work IMHO. Dropping automatically at the start of the 2nd turn means the units will get some use before the 3rd turn by both players and solves the other main issue with reinforcements which is that they can score objectives in some missions basically uncontested. Reinforcements drop in the ZOC of the Comlink unit if they are active, if not they drop within the players deployment zone. This increases the functionality of the Comlink unit and potentiality allows for interesting tactical deployment if you can move the Comlink up the table and keep them active until the start of your 2nd turn. It would force your opponent to concentrate on taking out the Comlink unit if they want to avoid Reinforcement units deploying in a tactically advantageous position but would also mean that you force your opponent to divert resources to doing this and not getting mission objectives which is a tactic all of its own. Reinforcements acting as a coordinated order is very interesting but I think the only reason this isn't already a thing is because their deployment happens before the actual start of the turn and units aren't normally allowed to ARO outside of the turn phase as it causes all sorts of problems with the other things that happen in these phases. There's a workable idea there but it might mean restructuring how turn phases work. I think we might see a re-work of the Reinforcements rule in a 5th Edition if and when that becomes a thing.

[@JonahStuart]

> One of the main issues at the moment is that there's no option to play a Reinforcement list against a non-reinforcement list which is something that would add tactical depth to games. Agree that this is the biggest barrier. There are always going to be people who just refuse to play reinforcements. You need to make it an optional part of regular play or it will continue to languish in obscurity. Which means it needs to feel fair against your average 300 point list. It sounds like they were designing that way but yoinked that option at the finish line.

[@thedicegodswg]

I see what you mean. So, I view the deployment/ ARO in the same way as I see the impetuous phase. This happens first with some familiar mechanics. But yes, it's a raw idea and needs a lot of tweaking. Also, that's an interesting concept of effectively pulling player 2 reinforcements forward a turn. The big issue I have with the point loss triggering arrival is, as I said in the video, that weird place it puts you of wanting your own troopers to die to get that extra bundle of units it. That just feel... off to me. I thought about the ZoC of the Commlink unit too. The issue I had was this; newbies are going to get battered over and over here. You need to be able to move up the Commlink unit to a good position, without leaving it too exposed. Most newbies struggle with this, so will end up getting their Commlink killed over and over. But, I do see the interesting ways to play that it opens up. Totally agree that it needs a rework. I hope that it doesn't get just left like Spec Ops, that would be a shame. For now, I think I need to solidify my ideas and get some play testing done.

[@thedicegodswg]

Should Infinity have Attacker/ Defender type missions too? With the attacker getting reinforcements and the defender not? Adding in some unique missions designed for the game mode would also help, I think.

[@DeepGreenX]

@@thedicegodswg CB toyed with some asymmetric missions a few years ago with a downloadable scenario that involved a beach assault. The problem is that the community is so focused on the ITS mission format at the moment it won't really accept any unbalanced asymmetric missions that don't fit into that mold. It's worth noting that CB's new game Warcrow has much more of a focus on narrative in the missions, probably for that very reason. The turn tracker wheel with variable round lengths and the ability to have NPC units activated during the game as a result allows for much more flexibility when designing missions.

[@jamespeterson9620]

@@thedicegodswgI think you could make a rule that made the com-link a more reliable landing and without the com link or out of ZOC the troopers deviate from their landing zone (use those template markings again). I do still feel that this midgame “let me deploy several models” is awkward and feels very 40k I go you go.

[@janofe2232]

Really like the motivation behind these changes. Have you tried reaching out to the Bromad Academy guys? They are developing the BAMS mission set as an alternative to ITS and ar looking at small fixes to rules deemed uninfinity or unbalanced. Joining forces could give you both more clout when actually recommending changes to CB.

[@thedicegodswg]

Might be a good idea, I didn't even know they were doing that, thanks.

[@Chris-bd6ll]

Would be cool to see a multiplayer format. Use reinforcement troopers only and it can be up to 4 players. 2v2 or free for all. Have no idea if it could work but sounds fun.

[@thedicegodswg]

It's just mad enough to work!

[@wit3215]

The landing coordinated order type mechanic is great, but the wip roll sounds like it will lead to a lot of NPE. My opponent gets 100 point advantage for a whole extra turn or two because of a dice roll I can't do much to impact? Much as I'm not a fan of point counting, I think it works better than this.

[@thedicegodswg]

True. But it does avoid the sacrificing of a unit/ units whilst not killing stuff insanity that points counting lends itself to.

[@jamespeterson9620]

I don’t think it’s a good mechanic. Combat jump and parachutist exists. I don’t know what CB thought they were doing with this “game mode”. I think your suggestion are good. I would like to see missions that make the reinforcement rule make sense. There are obviously scenarios where reinforcements is bordering broken. I scratch my head at the need and reason for the mode. The coordinated order for combat jumping and/or parachute troops arriving is the rule that would make people think about more CJ in army creation and that is interesting.

[@thedicegodswg]

I think they're trying to add something new to the game, which is a good thing. But I think this one needs a little more work! Thanks for watching.

[@jamespeterson9620]

@@thedicegodswg ​​⁠they did add something new. It’s called resilience operations and that is an interesting way to play that doesn’t restructure army building… it in fact opens up list creation removing need for specific specialists. I think that is the double whammy on reinforcements. Res ops is just better in so many ways.

[@thedicegodswg]

@jamespeterson9620 I see what you're saying, but I see res ops as a variation on the classified/ ITS game mode. An evolution of that. Not a new concept within the game. It switches things up without trying to add a whole new way to play.

[@Vertrucio]

Please adjust the volume of your pre-stream music to that of your actual stream volume. The pre-stream music is deafening.

[@thedicegodswg]

Thanks for letting me know, I will look into that for the next one.

[@eyaldiskin3665]

You suggestions are interesting, but your suggestion around switching the point counting to a WIP roll seem to realy strengthen the first player, since if he can assassinate either the other guy's lieutenant or his commlink, he will greatly diminish his ability to call in reinforcements.

[@thedicegodswg]

That's true. But killing the Lt is already a huge bonus as is. And, as with loss of Lt at the moment, requires careful counterplay. What would you suggest in place? And thanks for watching!

[@eyaldiskin3665]

I am not sure, but since the point of reinforcements thematically is to "turn the tide" when you are losing, it seems too cruel to punish players who are already losing. I would rather count points between rounds (and to be honest, since the starting player only needs to count once, and the second player needs to count a maximum of 2 times, this problem seem overblown to me)

[@jamesmaybrick2001]

@@eyaldiskin3665 What is the reason why people arent playing the rules then? I am but a noob very very early in my Infinity life, but for me (as someone who has yet to play a game with the rules, and doesnt want to), my reason is that they compound a minor issue i aleady have. We have these beautiful models that we have spent a lot of time and money on, but they can spend a significant portion of the game simply not on the table (either as a camo token or HD). Reinforcements reinforces (see what i did there? lol ) this by having a further chunk of models that might not see much table time and then not do much even if they arrive they might not do much. I may be wildly off, but that at least is my noobs perspective.

[@SamBenson-j4z]

At 5:12 you have it backwards. 250/10 > 300/15. I enjoyed the faster games, although some missions were incompatible.

[@thedicegodswg]

Ha, I did? Glad you're enjoying the game mode.

[@RattlerNxt]

I’ve been to two major Reinforcement tourneys. But not this year in 2024.

[@RattlerNxt]

I’m fine with these changes for the most part. The wip roll is too swingy tho I think.

[@RattlerNxt]

But I would try it. ITS Rattlernxt.

[@thedicegodswg]

Oh wow, awesome! Where are you from?

[@thedicegodswg]

Cool

[@thedicegodswg]

It's not perfect. How else would you do it?

[@許睿哲-w1g]

I plat white company,and IMHO NA2 faction has the worst commlink unit in the entire game:wardriver(unlinkable ,half a hacker,and COMMLINK(0).Why CB,why?),the most BORING,and probably the worst reinforcement list. So no, i refuse to play reinforcement with my army.

[@thedicegodswg]

Fair enough. The wardriver really is not a good unit! Completely agree with you there.

[@許睿哲-w1g]

​@@thedicegodswgThe only reason that might pull me into reinforcement mode,is i can play a 3 ANACONDAs list in starco,the faction i started to collect recently. It may not be powerful ,but sure it is hilarious.

[@thedicegodswg]

@user-pw8hh8jm4i any time you can add more Anacondas, it's a good thing.