Why don't my pan-O opponents use hacking?

A big part of hacking is force projection, it isn't enough to simply have viable hacker profiles. N4 hacking favours hackers that are safely projecting power from the rear of the table and to achieve this they need a variety of tools to deploy forward repeaters. Yu Jing went up multiple tiers of hacking prowess in N4 simply because it gained 2 forward deploying/infiltrating minelayer profiles armed with deployable repeaters in the form of the Guilang and Krit Kokram. Suddenly the faction could present a completely disposable defensive hacking screen. Bakunin has had a similar massive upgrade by gaining minelayers with deployable repeaters.

Pan-O doesn't have this. They have Peacemakers, but these are less flexible in footprint and also require you to expose resources so they aren't nearly as good as being able to start with a small repeater in an annoying but otherwise unsupported position from a minelayer.

What neither Pan-O or Yu Jing have is effective offensive hacking projection. This comes in the form of options like Pitchers and Fast Pandas, and to a lesser extent the Meteor. At best these two factions need to jog a trooper into position to effect the target which is very order intensive and can be stymied by deployable weapons fairly easily. It can be utilised as a zoning tool, where you can place a unit like a Croc Man or Guilang to threaten to attack any unit that moves up to an area of the table without dealing with them, but it's far less likely you'll actually find a chance to actually push forward and cripple the opponent with them because your opponent should be on guard against this.

Comparatively skeeting Pitchers or Pandas into position from a significant distance away is a much simpler option to get your hacker to attack something.

Pan-O hacking can still be useful but it's a bad idea to over invest in it because it is very limited in scope. At best it is an annoyance and a deterrent, it isn't something they're capable of building a game plan around like Nomads can. Slotting Jazz into a tinbot-6 fireteam and utilising disposable repeaters to force project her is a viable and safe offensive, Pan-O can't replicate this.

 

For many PanO players Hacking is a support or side concern, kind of a way to bring specialists or tick boxes. Many folks chose PanO for the aesthetic and to be the best at shooting people in the face, not to fry their brains.

 

Theres a lot to break down here.

KoJ is a major investment and while BTS 9 may read like a brick, oblivion in is current iteration laughs at it. The KoJ will struggle against many opponents who have good hackers that can knock out its effectiveness in a couple orders making it 1/6th of your list sitting around not doing anything or able to threaten effectively.

The AD Santiago is even more expensive as there is an implied built in evo tax to make sure he lands. Again, great on paper unit. The problem becomes that everything he does is less than 8 inches. This puts him in constant risk and KHDs aren't doing so hot these days to begin with. Ultimately, you're spending 60 points to try to hunt down 20-30 point units in your opponent's DZ with high risk engagements.

Crocman is fantastic. But what is he supporting? Again, we come down to the quality and price of PanO hackers. You admit that the fusilier isn't great, but that the bolt khd is a nice threat. The problem is you're now looking at 2 separate sectorials with croc in varuna and bolt in NCA. Peacemakers are vulnerable to hacking which is the paradox of using them as a net for PanO's limited hacking capabilities. As nice as BS 12 is on a line trooper, you really don't want to be engaging in too many firefights with them. Your opponent should be engaging them with mimetic troops which starts dropping that BS rapidly or warbands which can just drop templates rendering that BS increase pretty marginal.

Ultimately, the biggest concerns are cost for quality, the competition and a complete lack of upgrade programs. If we pay to get quality hackers, we are paying an extraordinary amount to compete and these hackers tend to be very vulnerable to traditional hacking due to a lack of marker states or tin bots to hide behind. If we dont pay for quality hackers, they are usually easily taken out or just cant compete. Our competition for the hacking game has access to all sorts of tools such as pitchers, tin bot -6 links, cost less and significantly improved hacking programs. The shooting game is where we have a small advantage, but it doesn't stop other people from shooting. PanO troops still get shot in a myriad of ways. The hacking game is far more binary. You either dominate in it, or you don't. There are fewer tools to get around hard hacking targets with hacking than to get around a hard shooting target. Hiding your hackers means that they aren't being effective and factions with pitcher access can always for the issue.

I play in a hacking intensive meta and as a result, I just opt out of hacking and lower my ability to be affected by hacking. I cant deal with Jazz sitting behind a -6 tinbot with hacking. Onyx shooting pitchers into my DZ means my tags first turn is shooting me. Yu Jing stomping up the field with a tinbot B, means my hacker is trying to tag someone on a 6 or 7. It is far better for me to lean into a strength than to cover up a weakness at great expense.

 

I played MO, now playing Vanilla, and I usually take one or two hackers. In vanilla, my favorite is Zulu Cobra KHD. Camo, FD, wip13, decent gun, gets her job done. I used to take normal KHD Santiago before fireteam update, but now I don't prefer him because he disturbs composition bonus. Alternatively, I take Order sergeant hacker in a haris with Spitfire bulleteer. A cheap upgrade to add 1 burst to bulleteer and another specialist is great I think.

In addition to Triumph's comment, PanO lacks affordable tools to deliver repeaters or hackers outside camo state (something like smoke or white noise). We have to clean up AROs to deliver our hacking tools but hacking wouldn't matter a lot after removing those AROs.

Also, we have to consider opportunity cost. KoJ hacker is 46 pts with combi rifle and bulleteer is at least 21 pt. No big gun in there but just durable hacker with wip 13. Total 67 pts and we can bring Swiss guard or Tik instead of them. AD Santiago looks nice but he's 45 pt, doesn't contribute to order, and even can fail to combat jump (no parachutist).

All in all, hacking is a side support tool for PanO to me and won't be a major game plan. I'd take one or two hackers or killer hackers if they are affordable (such as ZC or cheap upgrade to fireteam members), but I wouldn't pay any additional support for hacking.

 

What has been said above, while it is possible, it is a considerable investment that needs careful management, especially deploying a repeater network that necessitates having remotes moving forward.

What I do try, especially when I have TAGs is some form of defensive hacking, having two hackers in the list and a repeater or two around your TAG helps a lot taking it back when an opponent with better hacking steals it.

 

Also, do not discount Vanilla PanO if you plan to make a TAG list. They have gotten significantly better support tools in the last few years. Monstruckers are cheap and good engineers, and Beasthunters and/or MBHs can cheaply exploit an opening or get to problematic hackers.

 

It’s also (from my personal experience) kind of fun to use that EVO Hacker to enable your TAGs or HI to go Hacker-hunting. Fairy Dusting some like the Bøyg or a Lancer can be quite fun.

 

PanO is required to solve problems with guns. Sole exception being the GDA with a BS10 Eclipse, so yeah. There's absolutely no way whatsoever for them to avoid bringing guns to solve problems.
There's no delivery mechanism for CC troops either, no CC capable Impersonator or Camo Marker troops that could get into CC without shooting their way past opponents.
They're also low on template trading options that can do something from a forward positions outside Vanilla. Krakots and Diggers can do that in Vanilla but are priced relatively similar to a cheap effective Hacker (Regular).
There's also barely outstanding Hackers to pick from and not a lot of support for them outside of Peacemakers (Pitchers, Forward Repeaters are hard to come by or compete with an actual Hacker Profile). DeFeresen is very expensive compared to other Knights due to a lack of Frenzy also stuck with a mediocre CCW. PanO Hackers usually do not have any additional features beside being a Hacker. And if they do they are hamstrung in a different way (KoJ Hacker stuck with a Combi Rifle).

Noteable exceptions are the Regular Hacker (Grenade Launcher, Fastpanda, WIP13, great budget option), DeFeresen in the right mission (Teuton Haris gets him a Firewall and brings the Antimaterial CCWs, he slows them down having 4-4 though), Scylla in SAA (Aleph loaner and actually great at the job) and the Croc Hacker (just because Infiltration and Hidden Deployment pairs very very well with a Hacking Device).

At the end of the day you have to make the decision if you want to spend the points on a 2nd or 3rd gunner, a problem solver like Uma/Dart, ARO pieces or a Token Hacker in a world of Bit&Kiss, Anathematic, jazz, Interventors and barely hackable matchups like Tohaa/Aridna, where you might not get a lot out of it, even with Hacking superiority by default.

The only time you'll reliably see a Hacker in PanO is if a mission boosts it enough to make the investment worth it regardless of matchup.

 

Bla bla bla, git gud bro ;P

 

You can at least try to contribute to the conversation, why would you assume posters will get a meme reference from another thread most are not even involved in?

 

Well if you are writing something directly to someone the "quote" or "reference" features are usefull so that they won't miss what are you trying to convey.

And no, this (meme/argument) is retarded and (due to reasons I stated in other thread) I'm gonna use it when I see it fit (again I refer you to other thread).

And I see it fit here (instead of complaining how bad/boring PanO hacking is just make it work).

You are naturally free to disagree and state why and how I'm wrong with this line of reasoning (or lack of) - damn is sad that this sentence had to be explicitly written.

Have a great rest of the day

 

Well, yeah, 'make it work'. Rather than pissing and moaning, "oh, why don't we have X or Y or Z?!?!?!?", look at what we do have and how to use it. It's useless to say, "oh, why can't we Hack like Nomads?" "Make it work" and lean into the shooting and brute force, and if you can't make it work for you, try a different army. Bully for all the folks who've found something they like more, but it does beg the question why they keep coming back to whine.

 

Dude. These guys have been playing for years and are pretty clearly dedicated to their factions. This is quite literally directed at the guy who wrote the MO tactica- wrote the book- on playing the most aggressive, brute-force Sectorial in the faction. We're not complaining that we can't make our faction work, we're complaining that it doesn't work in the current environment, big difference. The faction's just missing too many tools to compete on an even footing now that evading shooting fights is so easy.

And as an aside, please stop insisting that everyone who has a problem with their faction buy a different army, or I will be forced to believe all the people that call you a shill. You're one of the few on here who are usually positive about stuff, please read people's arguments and debate them properly instead of dismissing them.

 

It's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. There are some here that are the latter. You can argue all day and it's just going to be trolling on their side.

 

(emphasis mine)

Since the conversation in the “insulting nerf” thread is clearly spilling it over here I would like to point that the most recent Spanish Satellite in Miranda del Ebro was won by @Rolc using Varuna. And it was a 2 day tournament where all missions used the RED Classified objectives.

I know it may sound like a ‘results fallacy”. But please account that we are talking about a Satellite, not a minor event. And that you can not argue that the attending players were low level given what the actual attendees were. So maybe, just maybe, @Rolc found a way to ‘make it work’.

But as I say in the other thread, making it work, and you enjoying the resulting playstyle, are two totally different things.

 

This is the highest rated player in Spain at one event where the missions are heavily focused towards area control and killing. Dont get me wrong, its impressive, but its not a complete data set and doesn't tell us everything we want to draw conclusions from. A quick glance over his history and of what we can see, he uses various factions, not just PanO. I'm rather curious what about varuna intrigued him for the event.

 

Yeah. That thread is definitely overflowing over here. I think this thread was actually good, analyzing PanO's hacking options, strengths, weaknesses, and opportunity costs. Until someone posted "Make it work". After that, people forgot about "hacking in PanO" and obssessed in "PanO works or not"

About the VIRD won Satellite, do you know how much that player invested to hacking? That would help our discussion on PanO hacking.

 

You can find the lists in https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/the-varuna-immediate-reaction-division-a-tactica.26460/page-15 , however, in the cutter list, one kamau hacker, in the non cutter, zulu killer device.

About Pano being able to hack, of course you can do it, with Peacemakers, even with Crocmen position repeater you could have a pretty good "hacking network". But, when we talk about be able to play to hack the enemy, what do you mean? To play the missile launcher combo? Yes, it is possible. Here even the humble akali could do some work. Making the enemy movement harder?