Turn-one aros are often set to force exchanges over 32" away (it's a 48" board, after all). If you can catch an hmg at 32.5" a -6 swing happens that often punishes the HMG user. You can't always do that, but when you can it's brutal. It's what makes the Noctifer such a proposition, because your HMG doesn't know the range band, and a -12 is a real possibility.
Long-range weapons are those that allow you to fire from the first order without having to move or relocate the unit to reach the optimal range. The MSRs have this capability and the MLs have it as long as we find targets within 40". On a full-size table, HMG and HRL fall short, especially on diagonal vectors. In the case of cores, the possibility of being able to shoot from a vantage point within the DZ is crucial considering how uncomfortable it is to move a core all over the table to reposition it. Regardless of the above, an MSR or an ML is infinitely better than an HMG in ARO, especially if they are linked.
You know, I had a thought- why can't Knight deathstars be good? Mechanically speaking? They're what brings people to the MO faction more than anything else. What kind of buff would be needed to bring a Hospitaller Core in line with other top-tier deathstars like SP squads, and why can't PanO have it?
Well, I think I wasn´t clear :) I put a step out of MO to go into SWF, since Boyg is there and not in MO. But we could have something similar with a HMG hospitaller. The thing is a haris really expensive in both cases really vulnerable to any "crazy warband" or "skirmish" with a shotgun or any other kind of template. Yes, you will have easy to dodge the template, but if light shotgun enemy can face to face without risk, so you are in the bad situation "dodge" don´t kill, so that extra cheap unit can continue trying to killing you. If success, rival well have gained a lot, if not, probably that troups will be still there, waiting for you to activate the expensive haris and to drop a template. Of course if we "extra push" we are tempting the luck, but they are some profiles that can do it more than others. This a discussion I had several times with some SSA players. Classic Mirmidons haris allow a lot of more mistakes than others, only because if something happen even without covert, mirmidons or character will dodge better than any shoot they could receive. Not is the same case for a boyg or a Justice K. better case scenario they will be dodging same value they are hit (I mean, that ML noctifer, for example, or even a Nadhir with flamespeaar). Most likely, they even can still "launch" smoke that will probably go better than dodge since value and burst and probably nothing happens. This is the main problem, for example, of a full core of Hospitallers, one miscalculation, the "party can be over". I´m really agree with @tacos, HMG are long range weapons. The situation where you can´t catch that snipper or ML ARO piece this isn´t something that happens too often. At least I think it shouldn´t, if they are no place to put your profiles without be save about that long range weapons and necessary to make a shoot out of range, I will bet more for a poorly table configuration. Of course it could be long range LoF that can be used by ML and snipper to "deny" movement, but.. even this kind of weapons will need to move a little and expend some orders to "shoot something", if they don´t need to "table have a problem" or, sorry if this sound blunt", the enemy is still a rookie or "don´t care" about how to play, or don´t know yet how. So, that "first order" "first shoot" shouldn´t be possible with a few exceptions: some deployment or "positioning" mistake, some movement skill like climbling plus or superjump that allow your troup to reach a LoF hard to prevent. However, for shure HMG and HRL are long range weapons.
I honestly think just Santiago (Hospitaller) would do the trick; now you have access to another heavy weapon (and a 0swc one at that), a killer hacker for cyberwarfare, and a tinbot. The link is still missing a weapon heavier than HMG, still has no cheap filler, and still has zero tacaware, but to balance that it has great stats and decent CC. You're left with a pretty interesting HI core, that is way behind things like SP and WB, but still viable. We don't need points changes or profile tweaks, we need a bit of a compsition tweak to make the Knight core viable. For a faction-defining core, Knights are absurdly restrictive. On the other hand, enabling such an expensive core would just draw more attention to the pitifully low number of cheap profiles in MO...
100% true. Once again, players aren't stupid. Players understand what kind of tools currently exists to open up defences without any risk or impose uncounterable risk to an opponent. Hidden deployment long range template ARO (preferably with MSV or mim-6) that can cause multiple wounds (ML, Flammenspeer, HRL) are good because they can't be easily countered by most factions. All it takes is a single good profile to make or break a faction. Let's say that vCA or Onyx just lost access to Bit & Kiss and Noctifer ML. New salt mines would be opened immidiately to subforums. If vPano got access to camopandas or bear-equivalents then this salt mine would close up very quickly. Perhaps CB should add a rule in the coming ITS16 that everyone can add a fastpanda to a single trooper in the list for free? They have already experimented with free tactical awareness and mim-3, so what harm this minor change can cause ;)
It actually happens very often unless you have a similarly ranged weapon to counter the sniper and not waste 5 orders in an order hungry sectorial like MO. "Poorly table configuration" is not a valid excuse to prove or disprove the fact that the HMG is not a long range weapon. A good table for a BSG is bad for an MSR and vice versa. I think that in other posts we already set the invalidity of "poor table configuration" to prove or disprove arguments. Not necessarily, tables with vantage points within the DZ are quite common, at least in my meta. And yes, denying movement is another of the many benefits of having a long-range weapon, besides killing of course. On a full sized table you cannot shoot from end to end with an HMG or an HRL, not to mention if the shot is diagonal. That is a condition that the HMG or the HRL do not meet and therefore I do not consider them long-range weapons. What is your criterion for determining whether a weapon is long-range or not?
They're also cancer to play aginst for a lot of armies when they're leaning into their core faction aspects of lockdown hacking, GMLs, and only interacting with super budget expendable shit like Chimeras. So you hate them because they aren't fun to play aginst for a lot of factions. I think this is why they get more hate than Vcombined, which is a much more unbalanced faction by almost any metric. Bakunin also just has a lot of raw power now, does win events, and doesn't give up amy of the classic nomad cheese to do it. The MO Tik is a load-bearing component for the whole sectorial, yes. Without him, you'd have a lot of situations where you risk getting locked down in your own deployment zone because your good options are all spitfire range. I'm not sure KOTHS is really on the same level - except for his suprise attack order(s), he doesn't fight any better than generic HIs that you'd want to at least harris link to reply on for shooting. He almsot feels like he wants to be a plan B unit. It might just come down to the fact that he's an expensive unit in a really price-constrained sectorial, and comes with an EVO bot tax that feels sort of mandatory to get him up to spec in terms of hacking resistance. I was also going to say he's prone to getting blown out by units with free AP or damage boosts on Carbonite, but it looks like that's actually just the Bakunin Sitgmaton and my experience isn't representative. I think this comes down to issues with HI deathstars in general. They have the eternal issues with template AROs. Hackers are very strong right now, and an HI pain train represents a bigger investment into a hackable active threat than most TAGs, which cuts into the ability to take Skirmishers and warbands to clear a path for them. You CAN solve that, but it would require coming up with solutions that preferably aren't just furiously copying from IA and stapling on generic value skills. And that's a lot of work for something that isn't a kickstarter project. Onyx maybe, but the vCA bench is so deep I have a hard time seeing them drop that far. They'd have to replace B&K with a Dartok (which is a downgrade, but a better hacker). Nothing directly replaces the Noctifer, but they still have the Malignos MSR as a mimetism -6 hidden deployment long range ARO for less than 40 points. It's still an absurdly expensive core with no order economy in a really expensive faction. The bare minium is probably to let the Teuton spitfire NCO sneak in as pure (somehow) so you can use the KC which seems to be how CB intended to faction to make up for generally high prices; this is probably going to be close to a 1 combat group list. I'd also question how "interesting" it really really is when it's something like HMG + Doctor + Santiago Hacker + 2 MULTI rifle filler. Maybe the one FD guy, but he's an expensive BSG. One of the problems with the Hospitaller core as it stands is that they don't really have three profiles you actually want to take, especially in a fireteam. I've said that before. Verbatim, in the case of the bears; it's a capacity to efficiently punish null deployment PanO sorely lacks.
They aren't "cancer" to play against unless you're bad, in which all factions are a nightmare. There are far more unfair things out there than Nomads. CA, Aleph, Haqq, Tohaa...
The Weapon range conversation is so weird to me, but it could be because I had the n3 rulebook that defined the HMG as " A powerful long-range support BS weapon with a high Burst value." It is also defined that way in the code one weapons guide: https://infinitytheuniverse.com/blog/infinity-the-game-and-infinity-codeone-weapons-guide-part-1 I believe it was N2 when the HMG was ridiculous and had huge +3 range band, but with N3 on they have codified it as a long range weapon. 32" reaches a large portion of the table, especially with 12" or 16" deployment zones. Sure Snipers and Missile launchers have longer ranges, but I never before had heard someone call the HMG not a long range weapon. For context and non all inclusive: Short Range Weapons: Chain rifles, SMGs, Shotguns, Pistols Medium Range: Rifles, Spitfires, Marksmen Rifles, Redfurys,Mk12, HRLs Long Range: HMGs, Missiles, Snipers, Portable Autocannon,
Well... I don´t think if HMG is or not a Long Range weapon is an opinion, by definition HMG is a "long range weapon", you can check it: https://infinitytheuniverse.com/blog/infinity-the-game-and-infinity-codeone-weapons-guide-part-1 Yes, they are weapons with better range, of course, nobody can´t argue with that, not even try. It is some of the points to choose "side", but while you have usually this kind of points where to shoot from long distance, pretty much you don´t want to shoot your linked ML against the linked enemy ML, 2 dices against 2 dices usually is not a good idea. Plus, HMG pretty much cover a lot of the table from "order one". Yes, of course they will be some points out of reach, but it will be too "buildings" and "elements" that should provide a way to cut LoF. Even if they are this kind of long range corridors, with advantage shooter points, then, choose that side of the table if you don´t have the tools. Really, HMG can´t be considered a "not long range weapon". But let´s say you do. That you need that extra distance, you have ML in MO. HMG is not being a long range weapon is not a fact, let´s say is your opinion. I just share the description of HMG. And sorry to disagree, they are bad table configurations. The game has a really huge amount of weapons and skills, of course it will be tables that suits better with a subset, but if deny any kind of opportunity to the other subset, then it is a really bad configuration from the competitive point of view, since not every army has the same kind of opportunities. Not taking this in account could be easily to deny some armies to play for the victory. To play with friends you can set any kind of table and have fun, but if not... In a full sized table only one weapon can cover all the possible distances, and not even within good range, "snipper or multisnipper", any other weapon has a max distance of 48 inches, I think, so even ML will left out of your own definition. Since it could be a shooting line from one corner to the other diagonally. Answering your question, for any weapon that allow you to reach from one deployment zone to the end of the other, should be considered as Long Range weapon, this suits pretty much with any weapon with a 32 inches. However, I was telling HMG is a long range since is the definition done by the game designers when they explain the weapons. You were faster than me :) thanks. Yes, it was really odd in fact this kind of discussion. I never thought I will find people who think HMG is not a long range weapon, but I think could it be useful to understand how others players feel the game. We all have too many different experiences, some good, some bad, as maybe are the ones from @Quehacesfede against ML and Snipper not being able to shoot then from good range band with an HMG. Coming back to the main topic, the case of MO having the Tikbalang is really hard, because is so good that if you are not using it you are having a handicap by election. Maybe I´m being a little dramatic here. You still can have the Sepulcre, which is really good too. The problem about MO is you have to rely in a few pieces and "you have no variety". You can try, of course, and I´m sure a good bunch of players have success by doing it, but for regular players, to do it so, is to know you will play "with some kind of disadvantage". It is like in soccer you align not your best players but the others to play a final... you know probably you will loose or, at least, the victory will be really hard.
That is such a weird discussion about weapon ranges, 16" is the average rifle range and spitfire equivalent (24") are to counter this, HMG equivalent (32") are to counter the previous range band and the last two weapons Missile launchers and Sniper rifles sit in a peculiar situation, were they both can counter the previous range band, but missile launcher is countered by both the sniper rifle at longer range and all previous weapons including the sniper rifle at ranges under 24". What can or should be considered a long range weapon is open to debate, weapons are designed o be a counter to one another. As far as the gameplay Nomads give, I do not know I have played quite successfully GML hacking list with MO, sure Nomads can do it more efficiently, but reality is as long as you have the repeaters and a few hackers, you can give the same gameplay, sure pitchers are great if and when they hit, but it is not that difficult to forward PanO remotes.
Oh right, the same manual that says Pano is the most technically advanced faction in the game. The manual can say whatever it wants, it can even say that the HMG perceives itself as a banana if it somehow serves the fluff. Ultimately what matters is this: I'm sure that particular text is a leftover form previous editions. It may not be a good idea but sometimes it can be your only alternative. Or maybe your mods for resolving the roll are substantially better than those of the other ML. I don't care if there are buildings or not, we are talking about raw range stats of each weapon. I don't understand what the buildings or the table setup have to do with it and why they were brought into the discussion. You can deploy the ML on the edge of your DZ and comfortably reach the opponent's DZ without problems and without sacrificing the distance bonus. What's more, an ML on the edge of your DZ can reach the other end of the table while maintaining the distance bonus and having room to draw diagonals that maintain the +3. I totally agree that this is a stupid discussion. Regardless of the label you want to give to the HMG, it has a shorter optimal range than the MSR or the ML and that directly affects the purpose that I established in my original post (linkable weapon capable of firing from a core towards the opponent's DZ without leaving your DZ). But what surprises me most is that the focus has been on the label I gave to the HMG instead of my comment about the terrible options that MO has in regards to viable platforms for MSR and ML (which are the weapons with longer range, even longer than the HMG although the HMG is also an apparently long-range weapon). And returning to the original comment, If the KoJ with ML linked with full bonus is oppressive, it would be excellent to have a less oppressive but scary linkable alternative that allows MO to make the opponent lower his head in order to advance. The Crosier MSR is far from being scary and fails as an active turn threat and as an ARO piece. The Tikbalang and KoTHS are fine but their reactive turn damage potential is considerably less than any decent linkable unit. In fact, any linkable unit with BS12 and MSV or mimetism responds better in reactive than the Tikbalang or the KoTHS.
Trinitarian with MSR is a reliable unit that has served with other names MO for a long time, I would wish to say Black Friar MSR is also a reliable unit, I do not feel it is that good, but I converted one so I am going to use it and see if she can be of use.
The Trinitarian MSR is great for active turn in an army with tons of good active turn hunters, but is not so much in reactive. The Black Friar MSR plainly sucks. Its only hope is to become linkable, otherwise it's bad and expensive, so double bad. In a game where linkable Epsilons exist, why the hell the Black Friar MSR remains unlinkable is one of the darkest mysteries still unsolved.
Where I see the use of a Trinitarian MSR is in ARO when your opponent is targeting already another trooper. This can really ruin his day, even more if the trinitarian can actually target a non FT leader trooper. But yeah… That’s very situational and the stars pretty much need to align for this to work.
Maybe I don’t have enough experience and I’m not playing against good enough players, but I really find the KoTHS to be extremely good, and I kind of find him underrated. It has NCO, it is well protected against CC units with NBW, veteran allows him to be extremely well protected against hacking, and its BTS9 makes it very durable on top of that, it gets back for free twice per round in Holo state. It has stealth, which again makes it capable of getting out of hacking areas without too much troubles. Holo allows him also to be well protected against Alpha strikes of Gakis or taighas. Sure, the Tik is arguably better with insanely better movement capabilities, but it has its downsides too. It’s a lot more exposed to warbands and is definitely more sensitive to hacking. I don’t know, but every time I used it, I was very happy with its reliable performance.
I didn't manage to use the new KotHS, but I do like the rework as well. The only thing I miss is how it used to be able to hide in plain sight. My favourite trick was making him a lone Machinist 3:) Regarding the whole HMG discussion, it doesn't matter in the slightest what label you use to describe it. What matters, is what role it fulfills on the table. And in our meta HMGs have more than enough reach to fulfill the role of long range fire support.
They tend to have a bit more of a gear check aspect than most due to the design of Hacking, which is infuriating to those of us who really like all PanO's heavy units and streamlined REMs. I don't know if you've noticed, but a good 90% of people complaining here are trying to use all their cool centrepiece Knights or TAGs and getting frustrated by an inability to properly support them or enjoy a visible advantage for the faction's sacrifices, rather than playing the tournament list with our boring-but-practical light infantry, a TAG, all the crappy pseudo-Skirmishers we can afford and whatever Character CB crapped out last as a band-aid for the power creep. After watching the tier-list video in the other thread with a far more optimistic view at a competitive level, I'm starting to be convinced that we've got more of an internal balance and playstyle issue in that our cool, fun stuff is all horrible while our advantage lies in very boring low-end units and extremely new units that many players just don't have or want. Again, why can't a Knight link be made to be good? What design rule would that break? What good reason is there for NCA to be awful at Hacking, or Varuna to be poor on the offensive?
First and foremost "characters" are AVA 1 units they were always designed as such and always will be designed as such. Now on your questions a knight fireteam be good in what way? there are several ways to interpret this. I am unsure why you claim NCA is bad at hacking and why you think Varuna is poor on offensive?
