Kamau are great. The problem with PanO is not that it is bad but that it is boring. That's fair tbh, I think that SAA definitely needs more cool PanO troops, MO has a lot of similary stripes of HI etc. Varuna could really revitalise them however
I agree entirely. I think the latest book shows that they realize they’ve been missing an opportunity and have taken a step to correct it. Hopefully that will mean they’re willing to tweak some of the printed profiles, but again this would hopefully be the first step in that direction.
I was excited about a heavy rocket launcher + submachine gun loadout when i first saw it. Which says alot about PanO.
Like I always say... haters gonna hate and they should move on if they think they don't like the way CB handles things. In my opinion they don't do everything perfectly BUT they do much more good than bad. And the comparison to GW lacks so many things you need to take into consideration: How many years the company exist, how large it is, how large the audience is, the age of the customers and so much more. Infinity is a great game and overall the best balanced tournament game to me. It has a great setting, they drive the story and release cool pop culture references. Thankfully, a bit less than the past year to make their miniatures more unique. Concerning Tunguska and the points thing... people tend to go for easy explanations how something is ruled and priced. The points costs of Tunguska are because of internal balancing the faction. Like every other faction as well! Day by day I am less excited about Tunguska. The models are cool, the rules are solid but still not as strong as the old (and new) Vanilla. And try to build list, play them, judge after... I still don't think we will see Vanilla Nomads lists change a lot.
While I mostly agree, none of what you said means that people should not point out flaws so that CB can further improve the game. Without feedback and constructive criticism, how are things meant to improve? I get that positivity in the face of everything and anything is nice as it avoids unpleasant topics, but just as you have a right to love all the positives, others have every right to point out the negatives :)
What's with this new generation shit about "if you don't like the way a company that produces something you like is behaving, just stfu and go away"? Is this for real? Do we not have customer's rights anymore?
I am with you. But the thread complained about something, we don't know nothing about. It is just negative without knowledge of the design choices. And if you use common sense everybody knows after all these years is that CB does well at balancing and that points are adjusted for units to provide internal balance for factions. The approach +1BS = X points is maybe the way CB does it first but they adjust it after testing as well. The only thing CB could improve more to me is the storytelling because they start some things but don't finish them properly in my opinion. Maybe hire some good authors and go on with more fluff. :)
Just look at the first pages and posts like #6... how is that a good way to handle it? And customer rights are not the same like customer wishes. ;) As well as you comparison with GW. I loved and played Fantasy... guess what I think about GW decisions. ;) Btw, I think I am the old generation. :D
I am the old generation and I really love the comparisons with old GW when people are talking about new GW. New GW blows CB out of the water on the PR/costumer relations front. If GW would have done what CB has done with Uprising (and with the constant power creep) there would be mobs with torchs and forks at Nottingham.
Obviously if people think that it's ok for some units to have broken (in a meaning of "not working" rules) and some other have special rules (quite lengthy in fact) designed for a single unit and it's totally normal, or people who disagree (with this state) should STFU then we have some real problems. I really suggest you looking into some factions stregnths&weaknesses other that "I have everything and more" Nomads. Might serve you. If points are now "sectorial relative", then it's really a hilarious mess and points should be abandoned in general as two forces having "equal number of points' is a illusion. Mayby, but Nomad's vanilla is really having everything and more, Haris, partial immunity to go 1st, additional fast assault piece, Lt protection in form of cheap Veteran, yet another strong AD, and some hilarious characters just for a sake of it (which are not-useless).
Yes, GW did well the last year... even I re-bought my old 40K army. :) They do much better than a decade ago but they have more ressources and SHOULD do better. :) Still I like both companies. And both do mistakes as well, for example the new army tool by GW is a joke but their miniatures get better and better. Would be fun to see such a middle-ages witch-hunt at Nottingham. :D
I don’t think neckbeards are too dangerous so that wouldn’t be much problem. I also like the uprising thingy. JSA didn’t really belong there and they broke off. That’s cool. We play Pano so we can hop on the #panowhinetrain, and no one can take that away from us!
Well, MO really don't belong in PanO, let's see what would happen if they took them away. And even if that happened you would still have the same number of sectorials the rest of factions have. Except YJ, of course.
