Barakiel

Full Auto or Fatality: Just what TAGs need?

201 posts in this topic

Full Auto seems like it was made for TAGs.   Having a minus to shoot at a giant robot as it power f's you with a hail of bullets sounds like what they should be all about.  

Fatality I feel as more of a niche ability.  It would be cool to see on a tag, but it's such a powerful ability that I feel it is best on models with more obvious weaknesses.   Don't get me wrong, it would be rad as hell, but I think full auto can be justified on a TAG whereas Fatality begins to cross into OP.

Let me polish that thought. 

Fatality 1 seems perfectly fine on a TAG, kinda fluffy even.  Turning them into a murder-happy crit-storm with level 2 seems OP.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought MULTI HMGs set them apart?

Honestly most TAGs don't need these extras. They can be hard enough to take down as it is. I've watched out of cover immobilized Jotums laugh at Panzerfausts. There might be a few odd TAGs that could use these, but I don't want to see it happening on all the TAGs or even half the TAGs.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Cothel said:

Honestly most TAGs don't need these extras. They can be hard enough to take down as it is. I've watched out of cover immobilized Jotums laugh at Panzerfausts. There might be a few odd TAGs that could use these, but I don't want to see it happening on all the TAGs or even half the TAGs.

I agree, and the last thing I want to see in Infinity is a clear advantage given to a certain play style. One where choosing the biggest TAG you can, supported by as many orders as you can, is clearly better than other strategies. I'm not saying these abilities would do that, but it's one step closer and I'm not entirely convinced it's needed right now. I don't want Infinity to become a boxing match between each factions big monster. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cothel said:

I thought MULTI HMGs set them apart?

What about the Sphinx?  Unidron?  Uhlan?  Tikbalang?  Iguana?  Gecko?  Scarface?  Anaconda?  Seraph?  Gorgos?

Right now, the number of TAG units without MULTI HMGs is comparable to the number of TAGs with MULTI HMGs.  Even if we lump HRMC-wielding TAGs in with the MULTI guys, I wouldn't say MULTI weapons alone are enough to set TAG weaponry apart.

I'm not saying that applying these new rules to TAGs is critical, but I'm curious to hear people's thoughts.  The story about the Jotum is great and all, but that's also anecdotal evidence.  

I was posing this topic to local players.  The conversation was something like:

"Gencon is coming up, and Thursday and Friday are pretty typical ITS lineups.  Have you built lists for the missions?"

"Yes."

"Okay, do those lists include TAGs?"

"No."

"Okay, if TAGs had fatality Level 2, would you take a TAG?"

"Maybe."

I know my example is also anecdotal, but it seems like a step in the right direction.  If you take highly competitive players, and show them a specific unit, and they refuse to take that unit... That's compelling.

If you make a rule adjustment, and suddenly they're considering that unit (but still with only a "maybe"... It hasn't become an auto-take choice) then isn't that also a positive to change?

Suddenly you have TAGs that are a fire superiority piece (as they should be) and they're offering a solution that's wildly different than taking a comparable HMG-wielding Heavy Infantry from the same faction.  They don't really lose their existing vulnerabilities (they're still Hackable, still vulnerable in CC, still vulnerable to template weapons, still able to be outflanked/outmanuevered) but suddenly you're getting more for your active turn investment, as well as making their BS-based ARO options better, to help keep them alive when they're on the defensive.

To summarize, you're taking something that TAGs should be good at (shooting) and making that role better, more unique, and more clearly defined.  You're not offsetting any of their other very significant weaknesses (a 5-pt Shaolin will still clobber a TAG over several Orders.)

For many players, no amount of enhancement will get them to play anything less than 18 Orders.  For many metas, this is simply the order of the day.  

As a top 10 ITS player in America... I don't see TAGs unless players are basically forced to bring them (TAGline event, Deadly Dance scenario, Limited Insertion event.)  

I'd like to see TAGs encouraged among competitive players.  

2 minutes ago, Jujoji said:

I agree, and the last thing I want to see in Infinity is a clear advantage given to a certain play style. One where choosing the biggest TAG you can, supported by as many orders as you can, is clearly better than other strategies. I'm not saying these abilities would do that, but it's one step closer and I'm not entirely convinced it's needed right now. I don't want Infinity to become a boxing match between each factions big monster. 

 

I appreciate the personal opinion, but I also don't think they can be universally applied.  Because saying that a playstyle "where choosing the biggest TAG you can, supported by as many orders as you can, is clearly better than other strategies" is hyperbolic and (in my mind) false.  Even with these changes, I don't think I'd run a TAG in anything closely resembling the majority of my lists.  However, I would suddenly consider running an Uhlan in place of a Swiss guard, or a Tikbalang in place of a Bagh Mari Haris, because suddenly the TAGs are offering something that's more interesting and unique than what they offer now. 

Many players will never, ever reach for TAGs regardless of how they're incentivized, because many players firmly believe you can't play competitive Infinity with fewer than 16 Orders.

I think these rules are an opportunity to swing the needle of unit selection back in the other direction.  The exact phenomenon you're afraid of is exactly the playstyle that should be encouraged: a playstyle where TAGs have a place, and you have to actually think about whether or not you want superior firepower or superior Order count.  

Because right now, it isn't much of a decision.   

Yes, there are players who play TAGs.  And there are players who rule their local metas using TAGs.  But that's not the same thing as making TAGs competitively viable for all modes of ITS play, and that's specifically what I'm interested in.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is in this game BS and Burst are durability as well as offence because that's how the FtF system works... infantry, especially linked infantry, being superior to TAGs at that meant they were more durable. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. 

Just to clarify also... I'm not saying TAGs should receive both these abilities at Level 2 and should Rambo around as invincible gunfighters. This is more a discussion of whether these skills, applied as Level 1 or Level 2, have a role in making TAGs more unique and viable. +1 burst is good. Doubling a TAGs crit range sounds like a bad choice, but I would be curious to hear from players in favor of it. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Barakiel I think TAGs have always been at a weird balancing point in this game.  They want to be big and strong and scary and hard to kill, but they also have to be priced so that they are affordable in lists.  I think it's pretty telling that pretty much every TAG since the original core book has been a "light" TAG of some sort.  It's a lot easier to get the balance right when the unit looks more like a really tough HI with an extra wound then when it is stepped all the way up to ARM 8 and maximum BS for the faction, with the most powerful armaments in the game (MULT HMG, etc).

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TAGs are fine, good players are making good use of them, the guy who came 10th at Interplanetary was running a double TAG list.

The problems aren't in the profiles, they are in the people running them.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Barakiel said:

I appreciate the personal opinion, but I also don't think they can be universally applied.  Because saying that a playstyle "where choosing the biggest TAG you can, supported by as many orders as you can, is clearly better than other strategies" is hyperbolic and (in my mind) false.  

Many players will never, ever reach for TAGs regardless of how they're incentivized, because many players firmly believe you can't play competitive Infinity with fewer than 16 Orders.

How can my statement be false? It's a hypothetical situation based upon giving more and more power to TAGs. I said i did not want to see such a play style dominant. In no way have I said it exists or will exist with these specific changes.

I believe many players have not been giving TAGs a fair chance since specialist pilots have been introduced. Nor have they come to terms with how to use these essentially new toys. People tend to be resistant to change and Infinity players are no different. Your statement regarding many players reinforces that imo.

Also, keep in mind TAGs range in points from 53-137. 53 point, ARM5, STR3, WIP13 specialists, are pure win imo and don't get enough credit. I'm looking at you Gecko with an honorable mention to Xeodron's.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Narkano said:

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. 

I don't think anyone was suggesting applying them blindly and universally to all TAGs, but if done selectively and carefully I think they or other skills could make sense in some cases.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

 

Spoiler

My thinking is TAG as a classification is kind of a negative. It makes you vulnerable to possession, hacking, worse dodge, and can't go prone. You get great stats though. I think the Sui Jian is a great illustration of a mini tag profile with none of the disadvantages and it's not OP as far as I know  

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Barakiel said:

I know my example is also anecdotal, but it seems like a step in the right direction.  If you take highly competitive players, and show them a specific unit, and they refuse to take that unit... That's compelling.

Just because a unit isn't the strongest/best choice doesn't mean it needs to be fixed. Same if some players can't wrap their head around them, or adapt them to their playstyle. Entrusting 1/3 of your list to one expensive, sturdy murder machines who can run across the battlefield at light speed (and now deliver a specialist to objectives) isn't an easy choice to make, but if done properly it can pay off.

 

Personally i do believe TAGs are fine, and from what i see in my meta i'm not the only one.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be fine for this to be added to some TAGs with appropriate cost. It does feel odd that their bigger guns don't do more damage at times (have you seen the size of the combis on the Gecko?!?). One problem is it might make them more dangerous but also more expensive and therefore more vulnerable for cost. 

That all said TAGs are fine now played well -  especially after seeing significant externally buffing through ITS and TAGLINE changes (we'll see how much of that CB thinks they need to retain in the new ITS). 

As Spleen mentioned we have a mate who just came 10th with double PanO TAGs at Interplanetary, (and would have come 3rd I think if he didn't neglect to coup de grace in his last game). That doesn't suck.

Sphinx certainly doesn't need it!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think full auto and fatality levels 1 are pretty thematic and would be very slight buffs to some tags. 

Particularly if they were active only skills. This maintains the weakness of a tag while emphasising the fire superiority/support they bring to the table 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity.... hands up for anyone who'd run a Nomad HMG/HRMC TAG over a Kriza Borac. Strawpoll here:

http://www.strawpoll.me/13627730

1/10 running a TAG is hardly a convincing sample size to be honest. That looks more like margin of error. Not to discredit the guy, but TAGs can be very hit or miss (ADHL crits and such). I like them and think they're very useful used right. They are not flexible or suited for every mission though (highly Classified comes to mind). Interplanetario was a Direct Action tournament, Firefight, TAG favouring mission etc. So imho the low amount of TAGs in the top 10 and seems weird. Phylk, Plebian, Spears and Marduk didn't even run one in their secondary list (no idea about the other 5).

The new Skills seem pretty horrible because they don't seem to work with the rules, but bend them instead. Solo HI with higher B than TAGs with the same gun? 10% crit chance without drawbacks or a countermechanic?

I do like the Full Auto L2 effect and Fatality L1 to some extent. Double crit and ammo drums straight out of a Stallone movie I do not. This shit is power creep. terribly undercosted and plain better than the alternatives instead of doing something different. No change at all would be preferable to GW level ideas like those. This is how you start to make a good game into a terrible one. So far CB did an amazing job, I wonder how it got past playtesting.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fatality is exactly the sort of thing that will ruin TAGs.  The Khawarij has something like a 37% critical hit chance.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solo HI with B5 has been a thing since the begining of N3. Kriza isnt really anything new.

I do think TAGs need a point reduction though, like seriously compare Su Jian to Scarface or Anaconda and the difference is astounding.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dasaan said:

Fatality is exactly the sort of thing that will ruin TAGs.  The Khawarij has something like a 37% critical hit chance.

Fatality 2, yes.  Fatality 1 would hardly be game-breaking.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Momo234 said:

Fatality 2, yes.  Fatality 1 would hardly be game-breaking.

I 100% agree. Fatality 1 is a good skill.

My immediate thought was at the way level 2 should work, is that you can forfeit the +3 bonus, to get the 1 critical hit effect.  That would allow the skill to be cheap, as well as rely on user competence.

What it is now is a no-brain math hammer. I strongly hate it.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dasaan said:

I 100% agree. Fatality 1 is a good skill.

My immediate thought was at the way level 2 should work, is that you can forfeit the +3 bonus, to get the 1 critical hit effect.  That would allow the skill to be cheap, as well as rely on user competence.

What it is now is a no-brain math hammer. I strongly hate it.

I rather strongly dislike your suggestion.  This game doesn't need more skills where using them correctly requires doing a bunch of math before the game and then memorizing in which situations they are beneficial, and which they are not.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly, id be more worried that these rules make TAGs and their emphasis on resilience less powerful not more. Both FA and Mortal Kombat have rules that help lesser models cut through tags. fatality does it stupidly efficiently with a Khwarij or tarik spitfire having stupid good odds of just pasting them without any agency on the part of the TAG player because its crits

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ToadChild said:

I rather strongly dislike your suggestion.  This game doesn't need more skills where using them correctly requires doing a bunch of math before the game and then memorizing in which situations they are beneficial, and which they are not.

I would rather have that then yet another entity that imperils the value of TAGs.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Dasaan said:

Fatality is exactly the sort of thing that will ruin TAGs.  The Khawarij has something like a 37% critical hit chance.

35

46 minutes ago, Teslarod said:

Just out of curiosity.... hands up for anyone who'd run a Nomad HMG/HRMC TAG over a Kriza Borac. Strawpoll here:

http://www.strawpoll.me/13627730

1/10 running a TAG is hardly a convincing sample size to be honest. That looks more like margin of error. Not to discredit the guy, but TAGs can be very hit or miss (ADHL crits and such). I like them and think they're very useful used right. They are not flexible or suited for every mission though (highly Classified comes to mind). Interplanetario was a Direct Action tournament, Firefight, TAG favouring mission etc. So imho the low amount of TAGs in the top 10 and seems weird. Phylk, Plebian, Spears and Marduk didn't even run one in their secondary list (no idea about the other 5).

The new Skills seem pretty horrible because they don't seem to work with the rules, but bend them instead. Solo HI with higher B than TAGs with the same gun? 10% crit chance without drawbacks or a countermechanic?

I do like the Full Auto L2 effect and Fatality L1 to some extent. Double crit and ammo drums straight out of a Stallone movie I do not. This shit is power creep. terribly undercosted and plain better than the alternatives instead of doing something different. No change at all would be preferable to GW level ideas like those. This is how you start to make a good game into a terrible one. So far CB did an amazing job, I wonder how it got past playtesting.

at least 1 player was running dual TAG pano in the top ten. Rory is an aussie and used his squalo lsit in almost every game

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now