Just reminding that technicly there are 2 templar swords in game ;) Guess who (and what type) wields the other one :P
Yup. The magic ponies of my experience with them before and after the change. I can complain about F-K's and compare them to new units all day long. And I do agree, that they still suffer the aftereffects of CB's lack of creativity when it comes to PanO. I can also field them and smile at how they work for me. The biggest complains about the MO makeover, those concerning the whole structure of the sectorial, were the removal of Fusilier (loss of three cheap order generators and the only cheap Lt), and loss of the original Hospitaller pain train. It forces people to look for new ways to play, and some are unwilling or unable to do so. The second set of complains is directed at specific units, and part of it is legitimate. Teutons are still mostly useless, F-Ks are underwhelming - especially on paper - the reasons for clunky OS linking are still a giant question mark, as is removing Santiago BS option. Others are much more farfetched - CoC on an expensive unit, De Fersen usefulness, Montesa makeover, inclusion of Tikbalang and Dart. I consider them silly. Yeah, would be nice to get a different one on De Fersen, but he's usually surrounded with DA CCW's wielders anyway ;)
Nah, some players are just a bit bored of getting repeatedly tabled at 2nd turn (by skilled opponents). Also, don't forget thats Joan's link just got some strange hit and new constraint. Fersen's CCW weapon is least of his problems ;P Well it's just that there is 2nd usefull FK profile (after ML) that is not totally made redundant by the new Santiagos ;P
CoC more expensive than your Lt. No TAG Lt in the Knight Sectorial, what the heck is Seraph TAG if not a knight. Listbuilding completely fucked due to lack of access to the most important Order Monkey and Lt choice with nothing to offset it. Haven't seen any Lt Skills or Tac Awareness as far as I can remember. Unless you want to count NCO on the guy you shouldn't be taking anyway over a Santiago. Lack of a Core linked HMG in anything except the weird new Hospitaler Link. That doesn't force a new way to play. There is nothing left. The cheap core backed by TOFOOS/Crusaders/Bulleteer isn't an option anymore because it has no way across the table. The deathstar that wasn't good to begin with is even more of a glass cannon thanks to requring Joan+4 Hospitalers to reform, laughable. 30 points ripped out of your usual budget, because the Fusiliers are gone and you have to fit a HI Lt that should stand in the back in there somehow. Compare to lets say a Daoying Lt L2 sitting save in the back as a Camo Marker. Doesn't even matter if you bring an NCO to spend the 2 Orders, that's already much better. So what's new? Cheap HI Core + HMG TAG? My favourite old MO list was 16 Orders Magisters + Seraph, I'd take that over this 12 Order mess any day. Hospitaler+Santiago Core? Probably the best choice - if you like playing LI. That format is as bad as MO so it fits. And last there is the possibly worst mixed Link in the game - FK+OS. Yay, so much choice. Can barely contain my exitement. But he's the idiot without Frenzy sitting on CC22 MA3 - so would be great if you'd actually want to hit people with his Sword over the Magister... no wait that's not possible anymore... Santiago next to him
The solution is pretty simple: just retire a third of PanO's SKUs so this opens new design space. There are many dated models, after all, so this would be a win-win situation both for the players and the company.
I'll trade getting old MO back with a few new Link and Wildcard options and then sending them in the freezer against whatever you're salty about.
Well the topic MO can actually compete (at anything) is wheaten they (MO) or NCA will be PanO's squat. MO "starter box" is old and showing. Teutons still could be just squatted (old models). Santiagos and KotHS are GREAT models but super old, and it seems CB is removing "pre-CAD" models in general. OS MSV2 Spitfire blister is also dead-weight. One of the Crusader sculps could also die (how many we have of them, 3 ?).
Sorry, Teslarod, but it's apparent that we have completely different expectations, approaches and experience with MO. I like the changes, you don't, I'm sure we'll headbutt over this in the threads to come. One of the reasons I really need to get out of my meta more, as I'm fully aware that I could use some perspective. Played against one of our old players that relocated to England, though. He got very skilled indeed, and he did win with his vanilla YJ against my MO - but only 4-3 and even that thanks to a series of a really good saves on his part. The game could easily go another way. So while I'm sure I'll get my ass kicked more than a few times, I'm also pretty sure I'll be able to hold my own with MO once I'll learn from more metas. Also, bonus points for using Mleczko :P
Nah. And with all due respect I might be wrong but please do go and play outside your little pond. Played 2 times against MO in my life (once as QK and 2nd time as NCA). Both times I was about to table (old) MO at 2nd turn. Also: it's not fun when players at tournaments imminently identify your Lt and then just casually launch Shinobu towards him ^^
Like I've just said, I'm fully aware that I should. But I'm also amazed how MO of all armies is making me eager to prove myself. I'm really having fun with them now.
Again. MO can be fun when you start playing it as "handicap-challange". But if you know you are going against some crazy lists (for example 3 combat group vanilla Ariadna) it's just a waste of time, or fishing for some hot dice rolls (or terrible rolls for opponent as I've already saw twice).
Well the people who like MO would have been basically alright with everything. The bar wasn't that high and CB did a fine job adding the new stuff in spots where it's technically there but you can't use it effectively (in MO - Vanilla says thanks). That you're alright with that is good for you, kudos mate. If you're happy about this result, you would probably not have minded MO getting squatted with new Link options and a new Profile here and there either before they follow ACON into the freezer. At which point I wonder if you even care about balancing or whatever I am on about. Which makes it questionable if an agree to disagree even works in our case. There is literally nothing I would agree with you on about MO. I like the new Santiagos from a gameplay perspective. Yet they're a hamfisted unthematical solution to something I'm not even sure MO had an issue with. Was Hacking too much of a problem? Did we desperately lack Specialists? Did we need E/M in every Link to deal with something I'm unaware of? It's truly odd, what exactly are Santiagos supposed to fix? Why did we need a supertoolbox Spitfire Specialist? How is that good for the game? What happened to the space escort/boarding party Knights from N3? Why are they suddenly AVA3 with KHDs and Tinbots? There, that's the one good thing and it doesn't make sense to me. MO looks like the intern was told to do it on a weekend of crunch time. Lack of motivation, theme, consistency... it's more than obvious that MO isn't like the others. There is really nothing in there to like unless you either didn't care to begin with or are satisfied with literally anything.
Teslarod, you're bitter and rude. And your rants and remarks about CB sacrificing balance to sell more models are tiring. You're free to think whatever you want about MO. But don't try to judge me on what I would or wouldn't be ok with and what I care about. You have nothing to base that on. So we won't agree on anything regarding MO. Tough.
Somewhere in here you mention hacking and I'd like to point out that NBW gives stealth. It's basically anti-MA with all the sub skills.
Man completely forget about that one, thanks for the reminder. Nah MO is imho objectively bad design. I also have some issues with Varuna, mostly the Kamau Sniper being too good in Fusilier Links. For me the problem here is mostly with people who like to ignore all warning signs, played two games against the people they always play against and then decide "MO is fine" disregarding all other indicators... like more MO complaint threads about MO than about anything else in PanO combined, general performance on the table for people who aim a little higher than their local meta (unfortunately a bit hard to track, CB doesn't directly disclose interesting stuff like Faction winrates after all), stuff like that. Having an oppinion doesn't give it any weight on default. No reason to get butthurt about getting called out on that. Can promise you it's nothing personal.
Amen and your opinion is just as subjective as mine. Also, rudeness - personal or not - isn't fine, and calling people out on it isn't being butthurt. It's sad that you think this way, though.
Well, T3 has some internal statistic. Which obviously is not as good as CB internal OTM knowledge, but worse only in the scale (it's only/mostly central europe data).
