I mean honestly i check the forums frequently and ours remains dead the majority of days, feels like all that could really be said about pano has been said. Nca got a pretty good update, so did acon and with getting shelved no need for speculation of more changes , varuna is great and brand new, and mo... well we got like 5 threads on how people feel about it. It feels like pano is at a drought of interesting stuff for the foreseeable future
Honestly I'm trying to master the changes we've already seen. Everything's in flux right now with the new releases, so it'll take a little time for things to stabilize. As far as lists are concerned, most of what I'm relying on is maximum DZ defense (typically can't go wrong there, and there's some nasty stuff that can be brought to bear against us.) The other big thing is midfield flexibility... Specialists, midfield gunfighters, mines, sensor, etc. The result is that I'm scaling back the points I invest in my Core Link a little bit. I think there are a lot of new tools that are strong vs big Core links. I think investing in other areas will help take some pressure and attention off the links, and perhaps allow them to be a bit better as a result.
Threat saturation is always one way to go about things. Helps out both in the way of ''If X dies, I still have Y, Z and W'' and ''Kill X, and you might be left exposed to Y. Kill Y, and X is an orders distance away to make you regret that.'' Threat saturation is fun.
It's unfortunate because I love talking PanO, but there really isn't that much to discuss anymore. Even with the new updates I feel as though our sectorial game plans haven't changed all too much.
Eh I mean, I dunno about all that. I'm sure everyone feels like they have a good theoretical handle on our sectorials, but now I want to see people go out and demonstrate it on the table. I haven't seen new Acon or NCA win anything big. VIRD's had some great top-place finishes, but we're still developing the knowledge base on the Sectorial. This pairs with the fact that VIRD's no longer the cutting edge... The meta has had time to adapt to their strengths... Which means the game will naturally be more difficult for VIRD than it did when we were first released.
I think acon is very solid but i dont know if they are material to take big tourneys in the current scene. But i feel NCA might have more success in that alley, same with vanilla pano
I think our sectorials are in a very good spot, power-wise, I think they just double down on defense and try to grip the opponent into inaction that way. We probably have the best defensive tools in the game right now
Interesting. I kind of hold the opposite view. At present, part of me thinks Acon's the most competitive way to play PanO. All those Minelayers are amazing... Midfield presence isn't quite the same as VIRD, but can do things VIRD cannot thanks to Nagas and Dart... Tikbalang is, in my mind, the most broadly applicable and easily supported TAG in the game... And their Core firebase is nearly as good as VIRD's. I think VIRD and NCA are strongly competitive, with plenty of tools for dominating straight-face-to-face, but I think Acon (as always) has the broadest toolbox (such a big deal for a varied ITS lineup) and doesn't lag very far behind in terms of dominating shooting as well.
Before B5 FAT2 I would've agreed with you on this one! Now...only when not playing against those models.
I mean, cmon man. It's literally two units in the game. Besides, multiple AROs, mines, jammers, deployable pieces of equipment, Helot templates, ect., all of our classic tricks still work on dismantling their link and killing the bonus as well as gumming up our FAT2 friends
Sure, it's just those two. Still, should adopt the strategy when going against them second in the turn.
The Fatality L2 thing... Were you planning to stand up your AROs against your opponent's 5 man link with a 50-60 point, Burst5, 2 Wound gunfighter anyway? In what universe was that a good idea, with or without Fatality L2? There's a huge disconnect here between people's personal feelings and how much impact these rules actually have on the game.
Oh i am 100% with you on the toolbox side. I guess i should explain that i feel that the raw strength on nca and viirds side lends itself to broader room for mistakes. Less chances for a dumb mistake because you are tired in a 5 round tournament to cost you a game. That's not to say it cant happen to nca or varuna, or that they dont have toolbox profiles, far fron it. I just feel acon has to leverage good play and skill to larger degree than the other two which give you some wiggle room.
I think people definitely overblow fat2 vs regular infantry, it becomes a situation of win bigger, those rolls were mostly already in your favor. But i think were it really shows strength is punishing arm as a stat. Before it was hard to try to brute force an avatar , sphinx or jotum in cover. Even if you were winning f2f rolls, they were likely making their saves. Now the ability to almost crit on a stick means you severely devalue armor
Wasn't ARM already devalued as a stat by quite a bit, or am I being confused again? I have a feeling it's the latter.
No particular argument from me, but the posters who say this stuff are typically also the players who aren't using Avatar, Sphinx or Jotum. They're the players who were already claiming ARM is the weakest stat in the game, and overpriced, and therefore not usable. I don't exactly get the impression that their tabletop gaming lives are ruined (or in any way impacted) outside of armchair quarterbacking various complaints. I'd be curious to query someone like Polynikes about this. One of the top players in the world, who routinely uses weird tools like the Avatar. As someone who personally played maybe 70% of my PanO games last season using a Tikbalang, my solution here is pretty easy: either take my chances that I can hide a TAG vs Fat L2, or just don't take a TAG in those matchups. Same way as not wanting to take a TAG vs monofilament opponents, or vs super-heavy hacking. You just have to weigh the pros and cons of fielding a TAG vs opponents with such effective anti-TAG tools. Maybe it sucks that an expensive unit can get wrecked so easily, but this also adds some meta nuance. Additionally too, Fat L2 adds tactical considerations that players can try to address via superior play. They're not uncurable ass cancer. For example, I'm a lot more interested in Nimbus, because reducing FL2 ARO to Burst 1 suddenly sounds pretty good.
Or to put it another way... Fat L2 is a lot like K1. It just goes about causing that wound in a different way.
Its a tad stronger than k1, winning a f2f with k1 vs someone in cover still afforded that person a 50% chance to make the save. Mind you im not implying this is like mono crits or anything crazy like that
I've been thinking a lot about how much our faction has been opened up for new playstyles now that we have all these releases/updates. NCA: Mine/drop bear mid field domination seems fun. Hacker game has significantly improved with the addition of Deva AHD & Bolt AHD/KHD. ORC core is now a thing, though probably not going to be used often. MSV2+ is stronger than ever. Vanilla: New irregular troop options (monstrucker!) for Joan. All the sectorial changes are greatly improving Vanilla as an option. It's hard to stick to one sectorial or vanilla with the amount of choices we have now.
