Collective punishment is illegal by Geneva Concilium Convention! But then again so are Chainrifles and Nanopulsers, doesn't look like anyone gives a damn *shrug* Hear hear "Clicked without too much of a thought"? Mate I remember a list posted in our club channel by Nosubject from a day ago :P That's category "Leichte Liste". 15 cap helps level the field for guys like our TJE - you know so he doesn't have to rely on drunken dice rolls (but still will do). The unrestricted format will remain available anyway for us nutcases as ITS Extra, but the default being more level is gonna be fun for the vast majority. Even if it turns out to be a race for the next broken thing, I at least would like a new one, the Meta got kinda stale over the last 3 ITS seasons.
I just took the last list from our chat...so no much thinking there. But N-guy has klicked lists like that...just brutal, and far better. EVERYTHING CB does in N4 will end up in being the race for the next broken thing...I just wish they would make it a little more challanging for guys like you. ;)
I for one expect Ariadna players are gonna be delighted about finding out AVA of Spetznaz, Tankhunters, Scouts, SAS and Vet Kazaks is in fact not 1! After the initial impact settles a bit, 15 slot max means 20 points average. That's not really elite army levels. 4xMutts just had to go for the greater good. Other than that Haqq does have some really nice stuff that never sees a table since it keeps the second combat group from maxing out. You had your chance during the last year or so where I wasn't playing much :P Btw C4? We're gonna be both retired when that hits (nice typo) :D
That from now on we will see more Tactical Window games? Sure you do, especially in big tournaments But the extra "classic mode" will continue to exist, so in the end it will be as it has always been: The event organizer will choose the most attractive TOURNAMENT EXTRA for him and for his community, so we can enjoy the way we like the most
That doesn't really add up, though. According to the ITS datamining, Ariadna plus Haqq make up about a sixth of all ITS-submitted lists, and due to players running multiple factions that means the proportion of Ariadna plus Haqq players is even higher. My guesstimate is that a quarter to a third of the player base play one of those factions. The much larger poll on Facebook currently has 1064 votes, with these results: Like: 749 (70%) Neutral: 203 (19%) Dislike: 112 (11%) Public opinion is massively pro or neutral to the change. Even if every single Ariadna plus Haqq player voted Neutral or Dislike, and every other player voted Like (which I know isn't true from the comments), that would still be a third or less of the Ariadna plus Haqq players voting for Dislike. Hmm, time for a faction popularity poll...
Really looking forward to CoC being actively useful to secure your LT and expand your maximum Order pool on top. This is exactly what most of them needed, Bolt, Pheasant etc. Now it's a budget question on where you want to invest your points rather than a hamstring on your Order pool. Naturally also opens up all those risky Lt options you couldn't take before because the CoC behind them wasn't really viable to run.
This rather indicates that definitions of what constitutes an "Ariadna player" and a "dislike vote" here are severely mixed up. Those who would be most negative about the change would be in the population of those most affected by the change. A dude who plays several other factions AND Ariadna / Haqq will be way more likely to be neutral or even like the change, because of his other factions. People who are committed to solely Ariadna or Haqq or BOTH are the most likely to be negative towards this change. The 18% negative here and 11% on FB (aside from being skewed towards that part of the general population which happens to be active on this Forum or on FB - and within that group to those who bother to click to vote) indicates to me that it is very likely that most if not virtually all dedicated Ariadna / Haqq players are rather negative towards the change. This would be well reflected in the comments on this Forum and FB in the sections / groups dedicated solely to those factions. People most vocal in the negative seem to be those for whom Ariadna or Haqq are the sole or core / main factions in this game.
Well apart from all of your claims about how any of that works being wrong, sorry for skipping the details, the people most vocal tend to be the smallest faction with strong feelings on the matter. People who are committed to solely Ariadna or Haqq or BOTH are the most likely to be negative towards this change RELATIVE to the overall reception. So we're still going to to be looking at a 3:1 or 4:1 in favor, rather than a 5:1 here and 7:1 on Facebook. It's somewhat statistically impossible you'll see even a 2:1 in favor of negative response given the very one sided overall response. That would require straight up magic (or cheating, but I like magic better) at this point. I'm not a fan of the FB community either, there's basically no fun allowed in regards to critical reception, reminds me too much of GW for comfort. Good place though to catch some news, great paintjobs, conversions and ofc some official CB communication.
Nah, I'm primarily an Ariadna player and like the change. Ariadna, Haqq, even CHA who are the swarmiest of the swarms, have plenty of 20-40 point choices in their lists. I'm primarily an Ariadna player and as guilty as anyone of passing over cool, useful, and interesting troopers in favour of "moar orders, moar bodies" but this change has me including far more of our toolboxy or heavier units. In my eyes the main issue Tactical Window fixes is the question "Why should I take this elite/toolbox trooper when I could just take more cheap dudes" and it fixes it simply, and effectively (along with fixing a whole bunch of other issues).
Another Ariadna sinner here. I too think that this is a great chance. My only wish for N4 is they fix the Antipode assault pack rule.
This is some really well thought-out and good answer here. I dig it. The more I mull over this decision, the more I like it. Orders are a key resource in this game, bodies come next, and of course, bodies can equate to orders, but it is not always the same. Ariadna with all its ambush camo tokens will still be able to project a much bigger and wider threat than other factions (seriously, you can easily put 20 camo tokens on the table with 15 orders or less, come on. So it doesn't hinder the faction so much as it hinders a playstyle. I will give pause to CHA and MAYBE ISS as they seem to have a more spammy design, but let's see how CB rebalances these guys for N4 first.
I'm just happy to never have to face 20 order kuang shi spam lists again. Granted, I have beaten those before with LI Ariadna lists but it's just not fun
ISS have plenty of options other than spam, that just became the default as it was the easiest/most effective. They've got some really nice HI and mixed links that might actually see the table.
Haqqislam player here who is fine with the change. Its weird when people tell me how I am supposed to feel. To me, it makes sense for a skirmish game about international black ops to have a unit limit. And looking at the ITS information, for most it looks like the 15 unit limit will not be a huge change. For the people who have to change their approach, I do feel sorry for them, but I think this may be for the good of the game. I am hopeful that the changes in N4 will give them the tools to play their factions differently. Swarms of warbands (and Mutts) have been a constant complaint from players for years. The unit limit and MSV1 change will hopefully help mitigate that as using a warband, flashdrone, warcor, or a Liberto is a trade-off now instead of a no brainer. Specifically for Haqqislam, CB has definitely been giving us more direct shooting tools (Mukhtar is a huge game changer) in the last year and will soon give us our 2nd tag. The direction of RTF now makes more sense in hindsight as it was probably built to function in a 15 unit meta. At least for Haqq, it feels like they have been prepping us for this change. I just can't wait for N4 to drop.
That, to me, is the biggest plus to this change. Since no one has to chase “more orders” anymore, every faction has more freedom in their composition of lists.
As of about half an hour ago when I grabbed the data from the FB poll (with 423 voters), the results were like this. The percentages obviously add up to more than 100%, as people were asked to tick every faction they'd played in the last year. NA2: 47% Combined Army: 36% Nomads: 34% PanOceania: 29% Ariadna: 29% Yu Jing: 28% Haqqislam: 25% ALEPH: 25% O-12: 21% Tohaa: 14% And this is the breakdown of how many factions people play, which is also interesting: 111 players play 1 factions 110 players play 2 factions 73 players play 3 factions 51 players play 4 factions 37 players play 5 factions 19 players play 6 factions 10 players play 7 factions 5 players play 8 factions 4 players play 10 factions 3 players play 9 factions I've not cross-checked for voters who play Haqq but not Ariadna, or Ariadna but not Haqq (to get a total of Haqq and Ariadna players), but Ariadna is already played by a bit under a third of the voters, and Haqq by a quarter.
