In Search of Wisdom - Why I Think Every Unit Has It's Place in RTF

IN SEARCH OF WISDOM - Why I Think Every Unit Has It's Place in RTF

In this series I reflect on the game of Infinity, as well the place of Ramah Taskforce in it.

 

"The Namurrs are hot garbage." 

"I'd never take the Tuareg Snipers when I can take the Shihabs."

"The Khawarijs are way over priced."

"Why would I take a Hakim, when I have access to AVA 3 Nahabs?"

Time and time again I run into the same types of comments, forum posts or tactica assesments. A unit X is never worth taking, because of Y or Z. The people are sure of the validy of their view, and no amount of discussion can shift them from the hill they've chosen to die on.

 

Only a few short months ago(!) the Good Guys Wear Orange was taking it's very first steps, and I knew one of the first units I wanted to write an article about were the Khawarijs. I'd run the Mk12 MSV L2 model a few times with little success, and each time I sat down to build a list around the Red Turbans, I came to the conclusion that they just weren't good enough a choice to use in a competetive environment. Then again, I couldn't write an article without properly testing the unit I was evaluating. To make matters even worse, the next game I had scheduled was the last game of a TTS League against one of the best players I knew, and the Mission would be (ITS11) Show of Force (a mission that requires the use of a TAG to achieve full points on).

I decided to bite the bullet and try something that I felt would not be optimal; I built a list that would include all the five different Khawarij models (and thus no TAGs). Nervous, but proud of the high road I felt I'd taken, I went into the game against my opponent's White Company. The first thing that struck me in the game was how off balance my opponent felt from the very get go. After we were done, he told me his plan all along had been to use his Core Linked Valerya Gromoz to fire Pitchers and Possess my TAG from afar, and then devastate my force from within. With this option (as well Hacking pretty much in general) out of the table, he started the game with his plan A undone.

Another thing that I learned from the game was that you just can't theory your way to the conclusion whether a unit is good or not. Infinity is in an open environment game after all, and while it's pretty easy to think your way through parts of a unit's profile, there are some things that only practical experience can teach - theories are at the end of the day just theories. The on paper sub-bar list with all the Khawarijs in it turned out to be the optimal list for the day in question. The table allowed for the Red Turbans to leverage Super-Jump to good extend, and being able to pressure my opponent with a twin pronged attack by my Haris team and my Spitfire Lieutenant was amazing. My opponent couldn't utilize his chosen approach to the mission, and with some luck (my TR Bot was on fire!) I was able to secure a lead in the match. Eventually the game ended in a cinematic and very appropriate way; I launched Smoke at the feet of the ORC holding the middle Objective and killed him in melee with my Khawarijs, securing my first ever win (7-0!) against the particular opponent!

Points of Pressure

One of the ways that I personally try to conseptualize Infinity, is by dividing the game into three distinct levels of play; the Strategic level, the Tactical level and the Cognitive level.

1. To me the Strategic Level encompasses the list building aspect of the game. Here's where you weigh the meta you're in, the Mission(s) you'll be playing, and possible opponents you'll be facing, as well as the ways you want to solve the problems presented by the afore mentioned factors.
2. In my mind the Tactical Level involves the choices available to you when you're actually playing the game. 
3. I think of the Cognitive Level as your ability to make the right decisions, and conversely to stop yourself from making mistakes that hinder your ability to win the game in the long run.

I feel that when players say they will never play model X or will never pick Y over Z, they are actively hurting themselves on all of three levels I just explained. When it comes to the Strategic Level, they are denying themselves possible tools that could have been useful in facing the Missions and opposing army lists ahead, as well as levelling the ground for their opponents in their Strategic planning phase, by defaulting to obvious, and thus easier to counter, unit choices. Who was ever surprised by a Core Fireteamed Kamau Sniper when facing Varuna?

On the Tactical Level, using only the most "points optimized" or popular units for their chosen roles will undoubtedly give you the best bang for your buck when the units in question are executing their main tasks, but at the same time, they may be left open to obvious counters, or in the very least, the player using them is missing out on the more varied tactical options available to them by taking more "bloated" profiles. Hammers are great for nails, and saws for logs, but an axe can be pressed into service on either of them...

When it comes to the Cognitive Level, an opponent who can easily map out your tactical options (thanks to your obvious and/or one dimentional unit picks), can also counter them more easily. This in turn means that they are less likely to make serious misjudgements and outright mistakes, while employing strategies that make your game harder are easier for them to employ. On the other hand, a diverse force that includes units your opponent may not be so familiar with, and one that can pivot it's approach the battle as needed thanks to it's more dirverse loadout, is way harder to predict and to counter, and this will in turn apply more cognitive pressure on your opponent, which will hopefully materialize as errors in play.

Let's look at an example of all this. I'm playing the ITS12 Mission Panic Room, and I know I need to assault and hold the Objective Room with sturdy and deadly troops, that are hopefully at the same time expensive enough to secure a contested room. The obvious choice would be to take the heavily armored two wound Janissaries, with maybe some Wildcards splashed in. Then again, if my opponent is expecting this obvious choice, they'll be preparing to use Hackers and/or close combat troopers covered by Smoke to take on my assault team. I then choose instead to form my element entering the Objective Room mostly of Khawarijs; they are durable, (though not that durable), they gunfight well (though not great) and they can fight in melee when pressed (though not their first option). Now my opponent will in the best case (for me) have invested points in counters to Janissaries who never went into my list, or in the very least he/she was mentally preparing for the possibility of facing them (the Strategic Level). I myself have several different ways of clearing an enemy occupied Objective Room; face to face gunfights, Direct Template weapons, Speculative Attacks with Grenades, or Smoke followed by melee brawling (the Tactical Level). Although the Khawarijs are by no means unbeatable (quite the opposite), the opponent has no easy and risk free way of getting rid of them, and maneuvering to take them out can leave him/her open for the rest of my force to take advantage of (the Cognitive Level). See how a "bloated" and "over costed" unit became a good pick for the situation at hand? Wasn't it (the historical) Sun Tze who said to fight the enemy where they're weak, and not where they're strong?

What Do You Have to Lose?

The Game of Infinity is a hobby most of us love: the chance to array your models to face your opponent on a beautiful table in a game of strategy and tactics is amazing. Most of us are also busy people, who can't play as much as we'd want to. This means that we can feel that we "must get our time's worth" from the games we do play, and that can in turn lead to us being timid about using "suboptimal" units in our lists for the fear of getting blown out of the water. It's also very easy to stagnate into using the same units and modules of units again and again, as we are comfortable with the picks and the cosistent results they can achieve for us, while missing out on what the "unkown" might have in store for us.

When I started this blog, I had the idea of it being another way of participating in the hobby that I get such great enjoyment from, and hopefully at the same time providing new RTF players with a place to start at. Imagine my surprise when the blog changed, no - evolved, my approach to the game! By wanting to write an arcticle about all of the units available to Ramah Taskforce, I was at same time challenging myself to try all of them out in a depth that would allow for me to write about them. This has led me to discover so many new ways to play the sectorial that I love, and so far it has given me the chance to find real, competetive uses for all the great models I have available. I feel this in turn has seen me grow as a player and, more importantly, enjoy the hobby a whole lot more! I hope that these days my opponents can't know what units to expect when facing me, as I've worked (or I'm at the moment in the process working) all the RTF's units into my repertoir of possible units to employ as needed! How great is that?

Don't Let Yourself Be Discouraged

The Namurrs are a tough, fast and versatile unit that would be broken, if it had it's points cost significantly lowered. My Tuareg Sniper took out more than 125 points worth of models in the last game I ran her in. The Khawarijs are freaking awesome. My Hakim has been the bane of my regular local opponents from the time before Ramah Taskforce was even released!

Infinity is an amazingly rich game. There are endless varieties of table layouts to play on, a huge number of armies and sectorials to face, thousands of potential opponents who approach the game in different ways, and dozens of more or less unique missions to play; not to mention the untold countless possible combinations of all these factors. What a model or a spesific profile of a unit is worth to a player varies greatly from day to day, or even turn by turn within a single game. This is why I think it's short sighted and naive to say that a model or profile has no purpose, either because of it's cost, or because it's role can be better fulfilled by some other piece in a given situation. To me atleast, the path to a more varied and satisfying gaming experience, as well as to growth as a player, has been to try out all the units in my chosen Sectorial, and discover what they can do for me under a variery of conditions. At the end of the day, this is a hobby to be enjoyed, right?

Until the next time - I wish you the very best in leading the Swift and Deadly Spear of the Haqqislamite Army to Victory!

27/4/2021 Edit. Corrected some spelling mistakes and added links to the text.