I... respectfully disagree. Gwynnbleidd makes some excellent points above, and the profile could have easily been adjusted if it was underperforming (and has been in Varuna!). I can add from personal experience that the standard model's additional ARM and Hacking ECM are vital in NCA when using it defensively. I maintain that the only reason there was a change at all was because CB wanted to fit a TAG in a small box for Reinforcements and didn't want to expand the PanO range. NCA has no S7 TAG profile that they can reasonably proxy in, and the model is beloved by many players. ...Just from NCA I'd prefer to see Maximus, Blockers, Quinn, the Mk2 itself, the Black Friar, Bipandra, Aida, Devas and the CSUs gone before considering our main battle TAG, and that's trying to ignore my own preferences and look at things with an unbiased competitive view. That's nine units, in one Sectorial. While you point out that the MK2 has a few more interesting weapon loadouts, they are also either redundant within the Sectorial or worse than on the MK1.
No, just no, while I agree I would not like to See the original Squalo gone, I would not sacrifice the entire newfound utility and the old staples of NCA just to keep a TAG that does more or less the same fire missions with the new one. That is an absurd proposition.
New utility and old staples? While the Black Friar, Bipandra and Devas are certainly old, much of their utility is duplicated by other more unique profiles (or less unique...Trauma Doc) within the faction. CSUs are a lot of fun, but ultimately occupy the same design space as Auxilia when not just being used as cheap link filler- speaking of, this is the only context in which Quinn and Blockers really serve a distinct purpose unless the sensor+biovisor on the Blocker sees a significant overhaul come N5 (which, to be honest, I would love to see!). While Aida admittedly offers unique access to Viral Ammo and Mines, as a midfielder she is outcompeted by Uma, who actually has Camo as well as superior gunfighting, and when you need additional non-Specialist midfielders the Locust serves well without being AVA1. The MK2 is simply a worse fit for NCA than its predecessor, as the added size, bulk and Hacking defense are very useful for the long-range shooting duels the faction favours and we already have a lighter TAG in the Uhlan. Maximus is the closest thing to actually providing a unique capability in the list, being a bulky close-in duellist, but he's also Hackable and we already have Shona. I would be completely happy to see every one of these profiles cut if bloat reduction were necessary instead of the perfectly serviceable Squalo. This isn't advocating for their removal, merely a statement that there's a lot NCA could lose before looking at the MK1- the MK2 really doesn't do the same job, despite its similar stats it is a more capable close-in gunfighter and worse at defense. Its MULTI Marksman profile is competing with the excellent (and linkable Specialist) Aquila Guard, its HMG+Launcher profile is less attractive than any other TAG alongside a Fusilier link with a launcher, and the MULTI HMG, while the best of the bunch, is also the most poorly suited to the MK2's weaker and more efficient statline- the extra armour matters when clearing hard ARO, especially missiles. And this before getting into the big diference the ECM against Hacking can make. It is a different story in Vanilla though, I will admit. There's very little reason to consider a Squalo when a Dragoe is available, and it's a decent option for bloat reduction in the specific context of Vanilla. Removing it totally would nevertheless be a cruel blow to NCA and Varuna players who still rely on the MK1 in many lists, especially if it does not see a more well-tailored replacement that the old model can actually serve as.
Ultimately the point remains the same, everything you mentioned has its own unique role and niche in NCA, Squalo MK1 and 2 are essentially GL TAGs and NCO Multi HMG, with minimal differences between them, while I am not advocating them been removed, its an erroneous hyperbole stating you would remove half of NCA useful profiles to keep a TAG that does the same function as another TAG.
The bit you are missing is that I think the MK2 is the one that is bloat. It may be newer, but it is a worse fit for the purpose, and everything I listed is in my experience less useful than a standard battle TAG. If NCA had to be pared down by nine units, I think we'd be stronger with an ARM 8, Hacking-resistant TAG in the roster than Blockers or even the Black Friar.
I entirely disagree with the idea that the Mk1 is better than the Mk2 - I think I actually have the opposite opinion. Yes the Mk2 has two less arm and loses ECM Hacking, but you get so much more value for your points, and the stuff you lose doesn't reaaaaaaally matter. The 2 arm is almost entirely irrelevant in active. You are still resilient to most common ARO weapons (MSRs, HRL), and for MLs the Mk1 gets a whole 1 more arm opposed to the Mk2. ECM Hacking is nice, but not overtly relevant - it's not going to meaningfully deter your opponent from hacking it during their turn, and it doesn't change how you approach enemy hackers at all during your turn. In reactive I might argue that a HMG with a very good F2F might be able to plink away at a Mk2 in a way that it couldn't vs a Mk1, but not before you'd be able to guts to total cover. On the other hand, the Mk2 gets the way more relevant upside of being S6 opposed to S7 - S6 TAGs in my experience feel so much easier to maneuver and deploy compared to their S7 counterparts. I guess maybe you might find the Mk1 more attractive if you specifically want an MHMG and a GL on the same profile, but imo the GL profiles are kind of bad anyway. In VIRD, I guess you also lose out on the DTW if you go for the Mk2, but VIRD has the best DZ defense (and probably defense in general) of all the PanO options - if you are screening for it properly it shouldn't be that much of a muchness. In sum, I think the Mk2 is just a more efficient package. It brings most of the essential elements you want in a TAG around the high 60s-low 70s (MHMG/AP HMG, 3 STR, ECM Guided), but gives up 2 arm for NCO and being on the cheaper end in general.
I believe that the Mk1 and Mk2 both should exist and they are different enough. The main question I see in N5 will be if Vanilla keeps the Mk1. I could see the Mk1 being limited to either NCA, VIRD, or both.
It can actually make quite the time-waster- Reset on 12s against even a very good opposing Hacker's WIP 15-3 can provide a decent chance of a total waste of a round, and it gets even better against weaker Hackers. Active Hacking has always been rather weak, and is usually only worth it if it can clear the way for a more conventional attacker or when going for Possession. It may be easier to hide, but that's not what you want it for in an NCA context. The S7 on the original Squalo makes it easier for it to see over obstacles, get sightlines and deny an easy approach to your army- PanO hates trades, so any excuse to get outside DTW range is welcome, and in Suppressive Fire the Squalo is an excellent roadblock against the durable close-attackers that can tear apart your poorly-defended Bolts or Fusiliers- it's an outright godsend against Bears and the like. I don't think 2 ARM, 1 PHY and ECM: Hacking should cost more than a Fugazi, and they're the only points of difference. This would be my preference as well- especially if the MK2 gains general access to its Reinforcements AP Spitfire profiles, which are a solid standout mid-range attacker option that PanO doesn't replicate too easily elsewhere. I'm a little worried about N5's potential treatment of NCA in general- not having Army options and rules support on launch is going to be rough, and NCA is fluffed as being a high-tech force so I can see a lot of old staples just getting dumped in the relaunch. At any rate, I might lazily photoshop a meme together tomorrow as apology for text-walling up the Squalo Support Group. Any recommendations?
Everything @SpectralOwl said above. Excellent arguments. On the meme front I currently have nothing to suggest but I will happily watch on to see what appears.
I’m confused, sorry, lol. I of course want the Mk1 to stay but it does already have a different combat role from the Mk2. As @SpectralOwl said; It’s size alone makes it better at denying approaches due to aro and it’s higher arm and hacking defences make it more survivable. The mk2 is far more an “in your face unit” especially in its reinforcements profile which I too hope it gets. I’d have been happier if the Mk2 had just been called the Stingray when it was released. An allusion to the chassis on which both the Uhlans and Tikbalang are based. It could then have easily fit in with the new Kestrel forces as their TAG and wouldn’t have looked out of place elsewhere. @Brokenwolf makes an excellent point that the Mk1 could be limited to certain sectorials. I’d be pleased with this too as it’d mean that profile bloat (which I honestly don’t mind, I only think that certain rules need to be adjusted so you don’t feel like you have to take some units over others) would be dealt with and each sectorial would feel like it had its own identity. We’re going to have to see what N5 does. For now I’m just happy the Mk1 is still alive and kicking. Edit: spelling mistakes corrected. Even autocorrect sometimes fails.
Stingray series is depicted as the "small" specialised TAGs, but Squalo Mk2 despite being "small" (and not a Stingray series) is a replacement for the MBT (that is already the chassis for Cutter, Dragao and Jotum), so that change felt a bit odd to me at first glance. But thinking about it, does that mean PanO will tend to replace the S7 TAGs by S6? (because they are cheaper to produce as the Mk2 lore says) Are we going to see a Cutter Mk2 (would fit better if it was a Stingray series considering its role but anyway) a Dragao Mk2 and a Jotum Mk2? (Mk2 lore is pointing it as being "far more modular to produce"). Interestingly enough all remaining Mk1 chassis are metal miniatures that will have to be remade in plastic at some point, so the jump to a Mk2 chassis could be done like that. And Seraph will follow the Mk2 trend (it was originaly intended to be S6 anyway). I'll be honest, I don't see the Mk1 being long term in N5, if at all. It's in two sectorials : Neoterra, that is officialy out of catalogue, so I don't even see it in Army at the launch. Varuna, that I suspect to be the sectorial that will be removed to add Kestrel. There's still Vanilla, but the amount of references in it will be reduced and CB may want the generic army to have miniatures still produced in it.
I can only thank you for inspiring my low-effort apology meme. PanO #1! (hope that worked, never used images here!)
Yes, the change felt a bit odd to me too as you say the squalo is the MBT chassis and not the stingray. Which is why I’d prefer they’d just called it that or even something else entirely despite it not being the stingray class. It could have been a new class based on the stingray. I’d really have liked the Mk2 to have represented PanO moving forward in name as well as technology without removing a profile that is robust and useful. Just rebranding it as the “Squalo Mk2” felt off particularly when the Mk1 works so well and CB could have used this as an opportunity for a new TAG for kestrel (though I guess the times of release are quite far apart) or just as a new TAG in general for reinforcements. If they do replace all S7 TAGs in PanO it’s going to be weird and not a little bit upsetting and I’ll certainly miss them. Most of all the Mk1 who is so useful. If we do see Mk2 of the Cutter, Jotum and Dragoes I will understand more as it will make sense from a story/military production perspective but I’ll still miss the Mk1. I suppose it all depends on what the rules will be like for N5. I heard Acontecimento was the one that was being replaced? As they have the least minis available currently. Please do let me know if I’m just Mandela effecting this.
Acontecimento is like Neoterra, it's officialy out of catalogue so it doesn't really need to be replaced (as it doesn't "exist"). I was talking about the "Three sectorials rules", Bostria telling on several occasions three is the optimum/maximum amount of sectorials available at the same time for a faction. So, if Kestrel is coming, one of the current "supported" sectorial have to leave. MO is a best seller and has been reworked not that long ago. Svar is the most recent "new" sectorial. Varuna doesn't have a proper action pack.
Ah, yes. Understood. I’ll hope the out of production ones appear eventually in the N5 army builder but I’m guessing from what others have said that it’ll just be the current armies at the start. Thanks for clarifying!
