Hey Smagg willing to talk competetive again, nice. Okay here's the thing. A tournament has shit tables and great tables. The great ones don't matter too much, we'll just assume our list works on them. What we need to be able to do to play top tier is to be able to play on a very dense and a very open table with the same list. Things that do that for you are generally high quality long range gunners as there will always be a 16-32" Firelane you'll need to cross with PanO no matter how much or how little terrain. For the most part Smoke helps a lot of other armiers to cirvumvent that problem. There are also other ways around it, namely Marker State to simply walk into optimal range, high MOV Cautious Move Spitfires (SuJian/Achilles) and very strong Infiltrating or AD assault pieces. MO has access to basic Combi Rifle TO, the possibly worst AD in the game and otherwise 3 HMGs, 2 on TAGs one stuck with the Hospitaler Core. Dart isn't really good enough to warrant spending your only Order pool on and you can't give her 5-6 Orders since MO doesn't allow that many Orders. She would be a great addition to the old Magister Core, new MO kinda just has her around. You'd be better off running her in any other place she is available in, SAA loves having her. The KotHS is neat, but a BS14 Spitfire at that price doesn't really cut it. Hard to support in the midfield, no protective Camo to prevent Hacking, Spec Fire or getting engaged by a dedicated CC troop or plain old getting shot by anyone who can see you without Discover. So much worse than a Daofei or Dart backed by a couple other Camo Markers. A Faction popping up in 3rd to 5th place is a statistical inevitability if we're including 10-20 player 3 game tournaments. Especially given that MO is much better with Soldiers of Fortune or Limited Insertion than in default 300 points ITS. Given the amount of MO players out there MO should have gone all the way by now. Their player numbers should be the highest in PanO, simply because they're new and shiny and people already have full armies and don't need to start collecting from scratch like with Varuna. No idea who thinks Vanilla PanO is bad after Varuna was added. Those complaints mostly vanished over night with the release of 3rd Offensive as far as I've kept track. In contrast MO complaints are through the roof, so take that as you will. Funny how 95% of the playerbase agree that the Kamau Sniper is borderline broken. Same for Mutts, Posthumans, Kriza Borac.... list goes on. There will always be that one special Snowflake trying "to make it work" without "the best stuff". Beating up your friends at the club is classic biggest fish in a small pond right there, could probably have done the same with USA and Morats. No offense but your post is a pretty good indicator that you didn't quite get what this is all about.
This. I have noticed there's a small number of user in the PanO subforum that have quite influence and have developed their own way of list building. As a result all the PanO lists I see in this forum are tailored following the same pattern. It just happens that the current version of MO doesn't adapt well to that way of building lists. Fortunately some players are already trying to think out of the box and try to adapt to this new version of MO. The statement that "MO complaints are through the roof" is quite questionable as I have only seen the complaints of a few users, always the same, that can be counted with the fingers of both hands. In a recent spanish podcast Gutier aka Interruptor was interviewed about the new book Daedalus Falls, during the celebration of the European in Mallorca. Somehow when asked about the reworks for Corregidors and Qapu conversation referenced the last reworks from 3rd Offensive and MO was mentioned. Gutier acknowledged that while he was aware that there're some players that disagree with the rework, he has received far more positive feedback than negative; and that in the end changes in an army can never cater everyone's tastes. Therefore there will be always people disappointed but it can't be helped. In that case you can adapt to the new situation or move on and try another army (and this game has many to choose from). That's why he quite satisfied with current state of MO.
How do you want people to argue if not from a point of some certainty? Using objective measurements helps form a basis for discussion. Otherwise we all just say "this is my opinion" and nothing can go forward. It makes for unproductive discussions where assertions carry as much value as facts.
I disagree that Dart isnt worth the orders as Rambo Dart can be a highly destructive force if given the opportunity. She is part of new MO that encourages the OS defensive link and less knights. You're also paying an additional 3 points for negligible benefit over our other standard linetroops and that hurts when expanded to 4-5 models. The FD Sepulchre isnt bad but requires a massive investment to aid in midfield work. Him plus 2 other infiltrators sets you back over a third of your list right off the bat but can lead to effective traps and baiting. Again, it's something that encourages the OS link.
Dart is far from bad, but if you want to build a list around you'll be much better off to do it anywhere else and not in MO. The OS Link is probably the worst thing about MO to begin with. There isn't a single LI Link in the game I can think of that is worse in terms of loadouts and efficiency. Which makes backing up strong solo pieces lackluster compared to Vanilla.
Not really, but the aggressive Fusi link thing is something used specifically by Sathuli. You may have heard of him.
yeah, low cost because -2 CD and -1 WIP if compared with the OS. I virtually didnt use moderators when i played bakunin, aside for Lt and decoys
That 0.5 SWC Spitfire tho. Yeah, Bakunin just has too good different Core options for Moderators to be taken into account. Especially their signature HI Core. Sounds kinda familiar...
I don't know Smagg, without getting involved too much between you and @Teslarod, I'm fairly acquainted with Sathuli and Nazroth and all I'm hearing is that you sound surprised that one of the best players who've ever played Infinity managed to beat someone with something untraditional. It's not as much a testament to the unit's strength as it is a display of said persons tactical awareness and good decision-making. Your example reminds me of a famous League of Legends player who played Soraka (a support healer) as a ranged DPS on a stream. He utterly demolished his lane and won the game, that doesn't prove AD Soraka isn't hot trash, it just proves the player is extraordinarily good at the game. PS: Yes, I am aware that League of Legends doesn't at all compare with Infinity but I think my example illustrates my point.
This. CB will develop what they think is best for an army, rather than try and please everyone, especially since CB recognizes that there will also be some level of disappointment.
Thats yet another thing OS cannot do xD Also I've picked a look to a biggest (known to me) "open" information about faction usage/strength etc. Have a look: This is based on ~1.5k players and around 2k matchups. Ranking of 100 is denoted "best" (most probable to win army). Those are 3 "weakest" entries (from the ones which had sufficient data to be analysed). Funny note: in Germany MO is actually "the worst" one ;P (according to same source)
Where's that data from? Is that all MO after the recent changes, or is it including data from before the change? What is the spread between weakest and strongest, I mean if the strongest army is only 65 then you're talking phenomenally good balance.
Internet ;P Just saying that usual vanillla Ariadna is on top place ;) Srsly I was already reluctant to post it here (because starting fights over exact placement of every single sectorial in this list is rather pointless), just wanted to backup an argument of "MO not doing the best"
No, histereris is much longer/bigger. So it includes results from before 3rdO (where imho MO was stronger).
