It is as accessible to you as it is to them. I don't actually know the methodology that Ieldin used to draw their data from the OTM, but it differed from CB's own data somewhat. Both showed that Dahshat and OSS were stronk, but CB's showed Caledonia to be very stronk while Ieldin's didn't if memory serves. CB's data was not as detailed, but Ieldin's did show that the running complaints about warbands and how high-miniature count lists were disproportionally better seemed to be correct. Regardless of which I don't think it's healthy to draw any particularly hard conclusions from a data set like that, but it is also foolish to disregard what prolific players are reporting when it comes to general trends. Whether you'll be able to see the idea that "hacking is dominating" or "impersonation is ridiculously strong" when looking at tournament results is not guaranteed as it is a level of granularity that's harder to judge - did they actually use the Pitcher and did they ever spend orders on the missile remote? People will, after all, attempt to find ways around it if their gaming group has people who insist on playing that style of games, while in other groups people may self-censure their lists if they find them to not be particularly fun. Then there is the other complaint that data won't ever show, and that's whether the game was fun to play. Anecdotally it seems like hacking dense games are a lot more likely to result in post game complaints. That is certainly a main reason why I don't play those kinds of lists (when I'm testing factions capable of it). In either case, the number of factions able to do this effectively has gone down so I'm in a sort of "holding pattern" with regards to how bad I think this tactic is for the game, still.
Nomad player here, N2-N4, maining them for all of N3-N4 in both European and US metas, casual and competitive. Nomad players are a significant portion of those ringing the alarm bells on this. It is not “just YJ players whining.” The current state is overoptimized, mainly due to undercosting of specific units, and now the availability of out previously limited choices like MBTs. It’s not so bad it totally breaks the game, but is bad enough that it affects game balance to give a palpable advantage against less-optimized factions in most areas other than Lt/Leadership. That’s why I and other Nomads are saying something about it. Playing Corregidor is a crutch now, which sucks because I really love playing them thematically. I play Bakunin mostly to avoid feeling like I’m bandwagoning onto the overoptimized faction… unless facing opponents against whom I need some help from unbalanced rules, in which case I haul out the Corregidor Cheat Code. Through Nomad players -requesting- nerfs to the most serious issues, we’ve successfully gotten some things that were clearly Borkasaurus-level broken like hidden repeater Morans when N4 first came out, or overoptimized-and-overavailable EVAders (only wildcard status fixed, which turned out to be enough to bring them back into competition with other available Nomad units in similar roles). They increased Jazz’s cost, probably due to feedback from those -actually using- her and finding her too optimized. All this to say: some fixes are definitely needed, AND have faith, they’ll happen eventually :)
I dunno about that last part; the worry is that they're one of the designated "protagonist factions" and won't be changed.
Preach, mate! Indeed, I also play Nomads and I remember laughing my ass off at the release of the Kriza. Back then it was a novelty, nomads getting oddly strong, optimised stuff that didn't quite fit the faction, but was fun. Nowadays they're getting that pretty much every other release. It stopped being funny and started being annoying. I am on the camp that it will get better. I'm looking out positively for the Hassassin and Steel Phallanx releases.
I don't think Nomads are much stronger than others. They do have advantages of having a lot of specialists for almost any mission but that doesn't mean they have an Easy Button. They have recently gotten some great toys but others eventually do too. I really think next year Yu Jing will get a make over for ISS. They never officially ended ISS but they have not come out with new figures for them in a long time. I hope they don't do a new sectoral but if they do then it's good for vanilla.
How about they just make all the factions strong rather than dragging them down to a level that is not playable. I’ve played games where the faction community playin said faction decide to cuck itself by bemoaning, crying, mashing of teeth, begging mother for a flogging, and eventually was gutted by daddy company. Enemy faction communities praised the heavens and those who were in said faction who were not onboard to be castrated were told to eat bugs and love it. Be careful for what you wish for.
The main argument isn't "nerf Nomads" it's "make Nomads adhere to their design philosophy and not intrude on character roles of other factions." You can do the latter without nerfing the shit out of Nomads. The Gator for example: Mine Dispenser? Nomad flavoured dirty trick for turning the odds in an engagement, good tool to add to the faction. ECM Hacking? Again, great rule to be on a Nomad TAG. Fits the flavour. NCO? Command skill, Nomads are traditionally weak in this area. A brute force skill as it directly turns into a firepower magnifier, again Nomads traditionally weak in this area. This shouldn't be on a Nomad TAG, let alone paying reduced Infantry prices for it. That's the kind of thing you'd expect out of a Pan-O TAG. You could easily slot a different rule onto the Gator, just pick something that's more Nomads appropriate and doesn't make it look like a Pan-O TAG in the wrong faction. The inverse is just as true. If we do what you ask and just buff all the other factions but pay as little care as done with Nomads lately in keeping factions in their lanes it'll be equally detrimental to the game. Could you buff the ever living shit out of Yu Jing/Ariadna by giving them a bunch of Nomad/Danavas level HD+ hackers and X-Visor Pitchers? Yes, you could. Should you? Fuck no.
As the one who LOVES the appearance and concept of brand new Gator, I totally agree with this. I think we Nomads didn't need or want any good NCOs. Mine Dispensor is tricky, ECM Hacking is very Nomad-ish(still, its anti-hacking ability is the same as Iguana's), NBW seems kinda Corregidor-ish so kinda agreeable. But Nomads' TAG getting NCO without paying extra SWC, when Pano TAGs do? Damn... It makes me have a guilty conscience.
Totally agree with the unfitting of leadership-skills on nomad units. NCO, CoC, Strategos, Inspiring Leadership, Holomasks, even extra Leutnants orders or Command Tokens dont belong into a faction of anarchic asshats. Moiras seem to be the only unit imho where NCO s ok (although i would prefer it to be bakunin only) for they seem to be the most structured of units in the whole faction. I realy like the Gator, but NCO seems like "well, now we have this TAG which isnt much more than a Lizard with a different second-hand-weapon and Melee-abilities.... what shall we do to make it WAY better without rainsing the costs too much? AH I have an idea...."
Yes and no. As the game progresses the faction must eventually bleed into each other. I think the main brunt of this statement is directed at Jazz giving CJC better hacking capabilities. In essence they are still Nomads. I think we are getting a bit extreme here. CB via past history has shown to take more incremental steps towards game mechanic changes than others I have played. So, I can’t see them blending the factions to such degree that they loose core identities i.e. pros and cons. For example, Haqq was the soul source of Jammers. I remember the howling and scratching of the face. but now you can find them in Pano and Nomads. Sad? Sure. That was a well know faction identity tool. Cue the screaming, self cutting…you get the picture. But, they are deployed and synergistically used differently within those factions/sectorials. That made me realize their is more to it than just that one tool when it comes to faction identity. Or, maybe there is less to a core identity as the game grows? Food for thought. Bottom line, there are so so so many angles this pie can be cut: sales, testing, core changes, metric data, etc… It’s just not really worth all the fuss imo. Enjoy it before it’s nerfed. And, if your feathers are still ruffled go to as many ITS tournaments and win - a lot. That will help CB correlate the power disparity. Wow, I wrote more than I definitely planned to. lol
No, they don't have to, and you're wrong for suggesting they do. Also note what @psychoticstorm said upthread - he says Corregidor is a brawling sectorial.
I’m more of just giving my opinion than absolutes. I remember arguing on these type forums when I was a teenager. lol I guess I’m wrong. CB is the only legitimate authority to answer some of these broad and acute questions so have a beer and build lists my friend. Now that you point that out I can definitely see that they do love a good brawl.
I'm not saying psychoticstorm is right - I'm saying that it seems that Corregidor has been turned into the "do everything" sectorial.
99% agreed. HARD NO to CoC in the faction, that would be like giving Pan O smoke. Same for leadership skills. Much as I miss the Intruder Lt., it made sense to get rid of that option. NCO though is the shallow end of the Leadership pool. It makes sense on Moiras, Lobos, and arguably Wildcats (who really need that competitive option to stand out inside the faction). NCO is fine on squad-focused troops, disciplined small-group leaders not good battlefield commanders. On a full-scale ARM 8 TAG though agreed that NCO is a cruddy choice for Nomad character. Speaking of which: The Gator is definitely not bland, even without NCO. The melee abilities and B2 chain rifle are already pretty distinctive: adding the Mine Dispenser to a TAG makes it seem really fun (have you ever faced a Raicho with the dispenser-shotgun combo? Horrifying!). There was already plenty of flavor: NCO is just over-the-top-sauce. We didn’t need a full-ARM-8 TAG in Corregidor period. One that outclasses the other ARM 8 TAGs for versatility and survivability, even less. Sadly that cat is out of the bag. The Gator will be allowed to be over-optimized for a while to help boost interest and sales… (…and to just make the shiny new thing extra fun to play, which is a legit goal for new features of a game if it only mildly distorts balance). Then, like EVAders, it will be brought back into line a bit when there’s an opportunity for rules reshuffling.
You´re right, I totally forgot the single NCO-load-outs on Wildcat, Lobo and Grenzer. Well, they are kinda "second in Line"-Units, soooo its fine i guess?
Everyone has different opinions, but I think the main complaint about Jazz was that she was very cost effective and as such very strong when she used to get full fireteam bonuses. In essence, a complaint about power curve and not identity. Proliferation is good as it ensures against that unique tools become too powerful as they'll be exposed to more data points of balance and the whole M.A.D. style weapon balance. Over-proliferation, particularly of stuff that's meant to be the selling point of a faction, is the issue. Maybe a bit unnecessarily colourful descriptions of people's reactions, no? I'm not so sure I'd agree that Jammers were a strong identity tool for Haqq (and Tohaa - don't forget they have fart magic version of this that's stronger!). I think the teeth gnashing was, again, about how bloody strong the unit was. As far as I can remember, there were very few Haqq who did any complaining about a small proliferation of a faction-unique ability. Probably because it was never described as faction-unique and there's always been fluff about how this low-tech device had been seeing fairly wide-spread use before people started getting worried about their Cubes. The core complaints remained the same; namely that the Mutta'whia profile was unapproachable for its price due to the variety of weapons at its disposal and that Tian Gou and Haqq Spec Ops in a 4+ man fireteam were off the charts strong due to the delay mechanic and the increased burst they enjoyed. As far as I can remember the complaints about Zulu Cobra and Hecklers were fairly minor by comparison. I was certainly complicit in this but I've sort of changed my point of view and consider the N3 versions of Zulu Cobra and Hecklers to be within what I'd consider acceptable. With faction identity we don't really talk about single tools, we're talking about fairly broad strokes here, and yes NCO is in fact a pretty important and big piece of these broad strokes. As far as the Nomad faction identity is concerned, they have some very clearly stated ones, primarily hacking, that they are allowed to excel at and that they are deliberately designed to be the top dogs at. They are quite frankly the best hacking faction with the best hacking sectorials and that's how it is meant to be. This hacking strength is well and good and maintained. Similarly, Haqq is designed to be a combined arms faction with the best doctors in the Sphere. The low cost of Rifle+Shotgun strongly reinforces the prior and the near-to-total monopoly on both Doctor+3 and Doctor+1w reinforces the latter while also being without extra cost. While there is a very limited proliferation, Haqq sectorials remain the only ones that have access to large number of quality Doctors in almost all Fireteams. This is also well and good and perhaps even a bit too well maintained. The complaints about identity isn't the same as performance. "Enjoy it before it's nerfed" doesn't actually make sense to say in this context. Identity is when the proliferation of a stated faction strength is allowed to be proliferated to the point where it can seriously be argued that another faction who isn't even stated to be strong in this area is the strongest. Nomads have this tendency to be that faction who's so strong at what other factions are meant to excel at, even to their own detriment where the Medium Infantry have a tendency to be poorly designed in the community's eyes to the point where it's become group think for the community at large that Medium Infantry is "bad" (when in fact, a strong majority of Medium Infantry in other factions are highly appreciated for the specific, usually narrowly designed, roles they perform) Nerfing is a source of feel bads for the players but it's sometimes the correct method to accomplish a healthy balance without having to move other goalposts elsewhere if all you do is buff stuff. That doesn't mean it's always necessary to nerf stuff that's performing well to it's peers - those peers might be wanting themselves. Yes, I'm meta-talking about the Gator and TAGs in general here. As for even less objective stuff; I'm having a feeling that CB might be looking a bit too much at data sometimes. Always felt like they only looked at the very top results and left the internal faction balance uneven as a result. When metas shift, having a faction with more even high comes out stronger (i.e. more resilient to meta shifts). Looking at data is good. Looking at data and asking the wrong questions of it is bad. Very bad.
@Mahtamori considering the list data they claimed as justification for removing jsa from Yu Jing I don't think they're good at asking the right questions of data.
