Hi all,

So with the large number of Infinity players we are getting at WgoL (YAY), Asher and I were discussing running a campaign. The idea would be to use some missions from the Corbus Belli forums, as well as our own generated ones, rather than playing Kill Point games. Missions tend to give more focus to games and make things more fun. We still need to work out details and any help would be appreciated, but ideally we would rank people by Victory Points and public opinion, keeping a ranking week to week based on how people go. Questions and comments appreciated, watch this space ...

I'm in. I'm very in.

Sure why not.

im always interested in campaigns where i can screw other people over and achieve very litlte myself


now i just need to wait for my order to arrive, then assemble them and figure out how to play .....

I..am not in. Between warmachine and topping off the few things I still need for my bids I can't afford infinity as well.

Cool good to see some interest. I found a really interesting mission which people should start off with.

BLACK HAWK DOWN

as political relationships usually are. a dropship pilot has been shot down while accidentally(?) violating restricted airspace on his return flight. the rescuing army is looking to get in and grab their downed pilot with as much stealth as possible, not wanting to trigger a major offensive from the attacking army. the attacking army wants to snatch up the downed pilot and his cube/sensitive information for use as political leverage and/or interrogation. to further complicate things, the rescuing army's LT is a public hero to his people and the attacking army isn't quite ready for the firestorm assault that would happen should that fellow get killed.


set up: roll randomly to determine who is the attacking army and who is the rescuing army then roll LT FtF WIP as normal.


deployment:

downed dropship pilot:

represented as a standard LI profile from the rescuing army with the following alterations: the character is injured and remains prone throughout the game unless carried by another troop. the pilot can move using crawl only. the pilot’s weapons are reduced to pistol and knife only. troops with the ‘no cube’ stat are considered to be carrying ‘sensitive information’ in the form of maps, pda’s, notes, etc. the pilot is considered irregular and impetuous toward the rescuing army’s table edge. they are considered a separate combat group of the rescuing army and act during that player’s active turn. the downed pilot starts the game at table center.


turn 1: both players deploy infiltrators only, and no more than 2 per player. all troops are deployed on their table edge. this includes hidden deployment – these troops must also be deployed on their player’s table edge in marker or miniature form. no AD troops are allowed in turn 1.


turn 2: both players deploy the remainder of their troops, again on their table edge in order of deployment. AD troops can only use the parachutist level of the skill and may be deployed any time from turn 2 on. impersonators are deployed
as if they had the skill AD:X tactical drop, along any table edge and outside of 8" of any enemy troops.

casualties: troops reduced to unconscious in an army without a paramedic/doctor are
not considered 'dead' for purposes of rescuing army vps.

fireman's carry: as per PH in the rulebook, a model may carry another model on it's shoulders if it has a higher PH than the model to be carried.

cube retrieval: removing a cube is a short skill for doctors or paramedics, and a long skill for everyone else.


vps:

attacking army:

+1 VP for pilot cube/sensitive information carried off of your table edge

+2 VP for unconscious pilot carried off of your table edge (this stacks with above)

+1 VP for forcing the rescuing army into Retreat!

+1 VP for inflicting 70% casualties on the rescuing army (this stacks with above)

+1 VP for inflicting 80% casualties on the rescuing army (this stacks with above)

+1 VP for each unconscious (not dead) rescuing army model carried off of your table edge

-1 VP for killing the rescuing army LT



rescuing army:

+1 VP for pilot cube/sensitive information carried off of your table edge

+1 VP for pilot alive exiting off of your table edge (this stacks with above)

+1 VP for forcing the attacking army into Retreat!

+1 VP for each attacking army model reduced to unconscious but not killed


NOTES: For this mission, the rescuing armies LT will need to be declared. In addition to the victory point conditions stated above, there will also be public opinion modifiers.

ATTACKERS: -20 public opinion for killing the rescuing LT, +10 for keeping him alive, +10 for winning the game (by getting the pilot or the information)

RESCUERS: +20 public opinion for rescuing the pilot, +10 if you recover the data alone, -10 public opinion if the pilot is lost to the enemy (eg if the rescuers lose the game)

Every player will start with zero public opinion. How does this sound guys? Post your game results in this thread for us all to see

Again, questions and comments are welcome.

cool, i like the idea of having rules of engagement , like the ones in[/i] This Link


thinks like, due to spy drones you can't use prohibited weapons outdoors
or there's a bunch of civilians running around and you have to minimize casualties (and not speculatively throw grenades everywhere)

they aren't really missions but could easily be made into some
anyway just some ideas, use them if you want

Thanks man, that's the idea. We will be incorporating things like that into particular missions, either to modify the mission, or public opinion, or both.

Sounds sexy. ...but what does public opinion do? And how would it be relevent to the combined army?

Well, the idea would be to rank ourselves based on win/loss ratio and public opinion, with public opinion being rated lower than winning.

We might have it effect whether you win a game or not as well (depending on the scenario)... also we might need to work out exceptions or alternate rulings for Combined... Anyone got any suggestions?

Public opinion will also effect how civilians/NPCs deal with you in future missions...

This is just Scott's cover, he nailed the last campaign he was in.

along with the whole " i don't know how to play infinity" its a damn good cover ,
also i fully intend on screwing ppl over

Infinity House Rule Ideas

This one has been said before: but use of banned weapons in site of witnesses causes public relations hits.

Also said before: surveillance cameras act as witnesses to bastard acts (such as banned weapons or murder of civilians).

Probably said before: cameras can be hacked to disable them. Could possibly also hack cameras to act as forward observers for purposes of indirect fire weapons (not guided as I think that would be a bit much).

Possible new idea: power grids. All cameras must be within range (probably 8”) of a power token. This represents some kind of power line or whatever. These can be hacked (8” range as per normal) so as to shut off multiple cameras at once. An engineer can also disable them, but needs to be in base to base with the token. Finally, cameras or power supplies can be destroyed by attacking them, but destroying power infrastructure will probably cause a public relations problem even without a witness.

Mission Idea: Hostage Run

In this mission the defender has taken a number of hostages and the attacker is trying to rescue them. The defender is trying to move the hostages off the table (and starts in the middle of the table, having set up first). The attacker sets up 6” onto the table, can infiltrate up to 12” without penalty and then follows infiltration rules deeper into enemy territory beyond that.

The objective is to get the greatest number of hostages off your table edge while minimising the number of hostages killed.

The number of hostages is equal to the SWC limit for the battle.

Victory points (vp) are scored as follows:
+1 vp per hostage that runs off your table edge.
-1 vp for BOTH PLAYERS for each hostage killed.
-1 vp for the side that killed a hostage. (so if you kill a hostage you get a total of -2).
There is no other way to get vps.

All hostages form their own battle group (regardless of how many hostages there are), are irregular as long as they are within 8” and line of site of a defender, or 2” if out of their line of site. If a hostage is more than 8” from a defender (or 2” and out of the defenders line of site) then the hostage is impetuous away from the nearest defender that they can see. If they cannot see any defenders then they are impetuous away from the nearest defender within their zone of control. If they cannot see any defender and are not within a defenders zone of control they are impetuous towards the attackers table edge (maybe this should be ‘the nearest total cover. If in total cover they go prone and cry until rescued by an attacker’).

If line of fire is drawn through a hostage (but not targeting the hostage), and the hostage is within 2” of the target then any attack roles will be at -3 to hit. If the attack misses as a result of this penalty (i.e. the role fails by three or less) then the hostage has been hit and will need to roll armour against the weapon in question. If the target is in base to base contact with the hostage then this penalty will go up to -6 but the targets side will be accused of using the hostages as shields and so will take a public relations hit (of some value yet to be worked out).

Thoughts, feedback, or comments? Obviously this mission needs to be play tested and refined… but I think it could be fun. So the beer says anyhow…

Looks good dude, game might be won by who has less negative VP

My thinking is that if both players are on less than 0 they both lose (or at best draw...).

Ok. We got in two games using the scenarios. One with Black Hawk Down, the other with Hostage Run.

Black Hawk Down is hell broken and needs to be re-worked from the ground up. It heavily favours the rescuer. There were a couple of ideas thrown around...

We can have the objective stay still until someone gets to within 8" of it. Once any side does so the objective will start to crawl to that players side (until the other player can get in and get it turned around).

Another idea that I really liked and think we should try next is that, rather than an injured person who can crawl around, the objective is a black box. You move up to the black box and spend an action to extract data from it (possibly a short action for a hacker). Which ever model does this is now "it" essentially. They have to try and get the model off the table. If the model is killed or knocked out they act as a new black box marker, so a model from either side can move up, grab it and try to do a runner.

We couldn't see the point of the special deployment rules for the mission.

We couldn't see the point of the luitenant being a hero and so a bad thing to kill.

The Hostage Run was less one sided (the battle was a bit one sided, but that was a player problem). Something that wasn't clear was how the hostage takers would set up. We decided they had an 8" diameter deployment zone from the centre.

One issue that was raised was that it is a little too easy to move hostages around. One solution was to have hostages contribute no orders (they didn't anyway), but they also have no order of their own. So to move a single hostage would take a single order from the pool. moving three would take three orders from the pool. My problem with this is that it would probably result in a fair bit of turteling behaviour...

I've probably missed some things, but cannot think of what right now...

Hmm OK, thanks for having a go and getting back to me so quickly



I like this idea I think. Would also make the game pretty dynamic.



Yeah I don't think you want to do it that way, cos you will very quickly have a camping situation, and it wil also restrict people too much which wouldn't be fun. Perhaps however controls the hostages just needs to spend one order from their pool to move all of them? PS did any hostages get shot?

BHD was an utter write off. Cool concept, #### execution. We should just re-write it from scratch.

OI like Michaels "Black Box" idea. Maybe make it hackable? That would give hackers something else to do. I'd suggest making it a hack skill to get the data, same as normal hacking, or a Long Order for non hackers. maybe a Short order of LI? Dunno, just throwing ideas out there.

As for Hostage Rescue, I think it worked really really well. I think the next minor tweaks we should make are:

Hostages: Make them a link team, who can only use cautious movement and can only have 1 order issued to them a turn. That means moving them costs an Order, but isn't so obscene as costing 1 order each.

Deployment: I think the rescuers deployment is fine, but for the hostage takers, it should be within 8" of the center, but NOT WITHIN the rescuing armie's table half. That stops things like Morlocks in the face T1.

Apart from that, totally awesome!

BHD was total fail but at least we tried and learned what doesn't work in an Infinity scenario. I imagine it's going to take a few goes as we work out what does and doesn't work for the game, especially considering there are no real guidelines as such.

I'd love to be a part of an Infinity campaign, but I think some more playtesting of scenarios is in order first. With a solid base of objective-based missions, I'm definitely in!

I'm also happy to be a lab-rat or guinea pig for anyone who writes some. I also have a few ideas of my own, if anyone's interested. Disclaimer: last time I wrote missions/campaigns was for 2nd Ed. 40k and AD&D...

Hey guys,

Been a while since we updated this. but on Tuesday I found a campaign system which was necromunda modified to fit Infinity. Damo and I had a game last night and it was a hell of a lot of fun, so we would like for everyone to have a go and get an army going. Rules and arm sheets can be found here:

http://www.reddinggamer.com/infinitycampaignsystem.htm

Armies start at 150 points. Have a read through the rules and see what you think, but Damien and I are super keen, and we can keep a tall of wins/losses, territory changes etc here.

It definatly looks interesting...

Nice find!

Necro was a great system (until Outlanders) and the writers seem to have merged it into Infinity quite well. But I have never seen or heard of a d5 until now, do the writers mean d4+1?

My only other concern is how the individual missions actually play out, something that won't be known until its been done.

Regardless, as an Ariadna player, I'm looking forward to telling people to get off my lawn before giving them teseum souvenirs at high velocity.

I imagaine that a d5 = d10 / 2

D5's totally exist, I've got one at home. Umm, Damien and I played the first mission from the game, which was really good. We do need to test others out though. And if we feel the missions aren't appropriate, we can just make our own

Some of the bonuses that characters get are horrifying (in a good way). I now have a Oniwaban with bs12 and cc20. Damien's holographic dude can now move-move and shoot at burst 1. Good times.

PS: http://www.thediceshoponline.com/dice/2894...5-Sided-D5-Dice

I'm not sure that being able to get multiple advances in a Stat is wise. One raise wouldn't be unbalancing, but a TO Missile Launching guy with BS 15 or 16 would be just plain unfun to play against...

Yeah. But that's necromunda for ya. The trade off is that theoretically, your stats should be going up too. And that the missile guy can be killed for good.

Killed? bah, put him to work in the mines!

-Dave

The difference was that Necromunda had a unified starting statline and set of capabilities, and also not much chance of choosing the kind of stat increase you wanted. It also had maximums. And whilst hardly the pinnacle of balanced design, the randomness of the system meant that things didn't get completely out of hand. Being able to pick powerful troop types out of the box and then make them more kickass takes the existing potential imbalances of the Necromunda campaign system and amplifies them. This is why Necromunda didn't use the existing WH40K troop types as a baseline.

I agree with Reuben here, for a system like this to work it would need to be built from the ground up with unified starting statlines.

Yeah thats true. But ou dont get to just choose to increase stats, its random. Plus Infinity is pretty brutal, so its easy for our gus to get killed. But yeah, it's not gonna replace 'vanilla' Infinity, but it looks like an amusing distraction as long as we don't take it too seriously. I assume you guys read through the rulebook?

I have similar concerns to Reuben but I think it is worth having a go of.

Excellent. I too have similar concerns, but hey, if the game turns out bad, we don't have to play it It will also give us a chance to maybe try and do our own campaign rules and stuff, hopefully give us some rules/missions to riff off.

I played 2 games last (this?) night at Damiens place. In the first I got smashed by Damien and in the second the dice gods were against Michael and I got a big win. After reading through the rules slightly I have realised:

1. You can get +5 exp for each wound caused at a maximum of +5 per order not +5 per game. Damien your +2 BS guy with the chain rifle should get +5 exp and both of my Auxila should get +5 exp.

2. One of thr requirments for a lvl 1 medal is simply taking out a more expensive model. As a result damien your chain rifle guys is a clear medal resipient as is my Auxbot with a "old battle wound"

3. Captured = dead for combined armies, so I don't have a captured Aswang

4. We should play the missions listed - they have impacts on teritories and such...

5. Models with the G: Servant ability, models with the
Seed-embryo skill, models controlled by a Control Device, and
auxiliary models with the G: Synchronized ability cannot gain
experience.

Correct.