Narkano

Members
  • Content count

    339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    2132d 10h 36m 8s

Community Reputation

194 Excellent

About Narkano

  • Rank
    Mayanaut

Converted

  • Location MN

ITS

  • ITS PIN U5802

Recent Profile Visitors

857 profile views
  1. The Teuton was updated in HSN3, so I'm not hopeful for another update any time soon.
  2. If you add the LGL to a list in army mobile and check weapons, it shows it as having a HRL and SMG. Now I can just be annoyed at the lack of LT in Vanilla.
  3. @Eciu well as @IJW Wartrader has said, that rule is kind of in beta testing so hopefully we'll be able to test it some and see how negatively it actually affects TAGs. If it does turn out to hurt them disproportionately, perhaps we'll some form of crit mitigation (now that'd definitely be a reason for trueTAGs to be taken rather than the HI pseudo TAGs like the Sui Jian). Since CB seems to be going down the road of playing with the crit mechanic there is a very slim possibility? Though really I do sympathize with where you are coming from. I'll be rather sad if TAGs eat another indirect hit from Fatality 2.
  4. CB seems to have been putting some work into trying to make TAGs more popular, see TAGline and remotepilots. So maybe we'll see some more tweaks to how TAGs work to make them a bit less fragile? Else im just looking forward to seeing how Oom/Helots work.
  5. I think it's more likely we'd see a change to TAGs as a class than to see CB go back and revamp individual profiles that have been out and published for a while, which is what I based my guess off of. Though if they did go back and make individual changes it'd be pretty awesome.
  6. I doubt Full Auto would be seen since even Level 1 would boost the HRMC wielding TAGs to B6, Level 2 would make Cutters and Sphinxs -9 without cover or surprise shot. Fatality I could see working decently well at Level 1, Level 2 I don't even know how I feel about it even being in the game as of yet, but it'd probably be kind of ridiculously good on TAGs. I do agree TAGs need something, and any of those abilities applied to TAGs would make me very happy. TAGline did at least show CB realized TAGs needed a change, though I don't know if they plan to keep on adjusting them. If I was going to suggest a change, I'd get rid of the dodge penalty or reduce it to -3. Maybe give all TAGs a regular order and 1 irregular order, or give them something similar to the low tech rule so after three wounds they go to a limp mode profile (similar to possessed) to try and get to an engineer, then one more wound knocks them out.
  7. could I go for: Deva (Fem) Bagh Mari Sniper Muttawi’ah + Jammer (fem)
  8. Can't say I disagree ( was attempting to summarize an alternate view). Though Knights do still have a hard time getting into cc in my experience. Except my Montesa, despite his middling CC stats that dude has killed numerous Jaguars and multiple Senor Massacres.
  9. One thing (may have turned into several) to build on what @Death said about streamlined units. I think many of our best units (Nisse, Swiss, Fusiliers, Bulleteers) do a great job of conforming to the idea of being streamlined. I know PsychoticStorm (been around forever, moderates, has spoken with CB staff, has a table top avatar) has also mentioned this before as well which leads to believe that somewhere this is part of CB's design philosophy for PanO. On the flip side many of the units people tend not to like, suffer from bloat (Bipandra being the obvious example). I get the impression that when CB decides a unit needs to cost X amount and they go in with that mindset on PanO troops the desire to keep the effecient nature keeps them from adding rules like say Poison, x-visor, or Automedkit as cost boosters instead going for smaller seemingly arbitrary stat bumps like PH or ARM. When we do see PanO units with special skills they are optimized around those skills. Bolts spring to mind as a unit whose whole purpose seems to be to be hard to dislodge for bio munitions and be regular in lol. They do both those things quite well, but their lack of synergy in NCA (few good aggressive LTs) and inability to choose when to utilize their given optimization does them few favors. Which then leads to this post getting really long, but because PanO tends not to be a very synergistic faction (best TAGs worst engineer, HI sectorial with poor hacking defense) it starts to ouch players toward always picking the best optimized troops. Which then loops back to so many lists rely on Bulleteers, Hospitallers, Swiss Guards, and Nisse. Those are often the best optimized choices and there isn't a synergistic way to to make Teuton fill the spot a Hospitaller will. TL;DR optimization is good, but may lead to some of the common complaints in PanO with its current implementation.
  10. I think part of this comes from PanO being positioned as something of a beginner friendly faction. PsychoticStorm has mentioned several times and he tends to know what he is talking about when it comes to CB. I do find the idea slightly paradoxical as while the mechanics of PanO maybe marginally faster to grasp for a new player and they'll likely win a few more games against an Icestorm opponent but in the end the restrictions on tools ends up making the faction's solely brute force nature harder to leverage against experienced and skilled opponents. In the end a good PanO player in some ways has to be very very good to do well (not taking away from skilled players of other factions, but competitive PanO sometimes feels like hard mode.)
  11. Since my last big tournament I've not gotten to play very much so instead I've been sitting around trying to figure how people approach PanO as a faction. To step away from Infinity for a moment, I tend to avoid conflict and prefer to not be the squeaky wheel in most situations. Which then leads into why I got to wondering why PanO tends to perceived as the squeaky wheel. While I have my own conclusions I'm curious as to what others impression of the faction are. Is there a good reason for PanO being the faction folks seem to love to hate? Is PanO perfectly fine and the posters on the forum just enjoy grousing? I should say this isn't meant to be about gib smoke pl0x, more "why do you approach PanO from the view point that it is hunky-dory or that it is not quite there?"
  12. Yu Jing has a thing for everyone being into CC, used to be their whole faction schtick back in N2 before the HI emphasis. So they've always had an affinity for CC. It's also much less overwhelming to the rest of the model.
  13. If I'm in charge of the mission and think it's going to be a hazard to its succes, yes. Though of course I'm not saying you can't like him, I'm happy that folks do enjoy him, but the unit that should never use a CCW being sculpted with the biggest sword not on TAG we've seen yet (in PanO) just doesn't make sense to me. Really I think he is a well executed model and would be happy to have his pose and sword as a knight, as it stands though I'll get him and use what meager conversion skills I have to get him a better hand and give his sword to one of my knights who might use it.
  14. But why is he bringing a ceremonial sword to a black ops mission?
  15. I think it is less about rubbing it in and more not having someone at HQ who thinks PanO is awesome like say Yu Jing, Tohaa, or Nomads seem to. So no pushing for design restrictions to Ben lifted or relaxedor putting in stuff because it would be awesome. Edit: grammar