Tikbalang could certainly do the job, but it could use a loadout with a close-range gun- I've found PanO TAGs are actually pretty bad at assaulting more densely-packed terrain due to the HMG rangebands, a Spitfire somewhere in the range would be welcome.
@daboarder, stop, there are ways and ways to disagree, and this is exactly the kind @psychoticstorm was talking about few comments up. Multi Spitfire :D When it'll show up it's definitely one of PanO TAGs that should get it. But it'll be a costly weapon, so cheaper options - Mk12 (maybe Breaker Mk12)? Heavy Shotgun with (+1B)? Or a combination, Mk12 and Heavy Shotgun, no HFT of course. This would be a good weapon combination for an assault TAG.
Let me try another way. Infinity is a game where everything can kill everything else in the game irrespective of relative costing. With a single exception. And that single exception to the rules is the very unit being argued loses its value because a cheap unit poses a non zero risk to it. It is, not a very good arguement givem the context of infinity as a game
I thought, as someone asked how FoCo play relative to Pano, I'd stick my oar in here to say: they are a huge amount of fun. Two cores that are relevant to this discussion would be: - Bolts + Valkyrie (pure), which is every bit as dangerous as in NCA (but can field with a beast hunter and two zeros in midfield and a Chimera for outrageous violence). Weirdly similar approach to new vanilla ariadna: you can't afford to null deploy because Chimera will tear you up, but you can't afford to put up expensive aros because that Bolt sniper will punch your ticket. Once the sniper(s) drop you're left with a Bolt spitfire, a specialist and Valkyrie haris to go have a wonderful time together. - Orc core with Laxmee + Señor (pure), which is for my money the best way to play Orcs in the game, beating any Pano iteration hands down. You have an s-tier hacker benefitiing from their tinbot, and one of the most dangerous melee specialists in the game. It doesn't get played that much, due to those darn Bolts, but it's a real honest-to-goodness way to make Orc core shine. Other honorable mentions for loan Pano units have to be a peacemaker for Laxmee to profit from, and the venerable Akal spitfire, what a bargain basement champ he is. I did a breakdown of FoCo on WIP12 a few months ago, if anyone wants to hear more on my take. For my money they're a really great, yet weirdly underplayed, NA2 faction.
@Time Bandit this got me thinking about ways to spice things up using only the fireteam composition. Acontecimento example, assume no changes to units:
@Time Bandit Never took a serious look at ForCo before, I think you just sold me on them. That Orc core has me very intrigued.
The Tik is already a great value, giving it the benefits of a Haris is probably more than we can justify for internal and external balance. I think the pathfinder makes good sense to enter our fireteams, though maybe next season so it's not measured as a tac aware grab. Tuecer, Scylla and Fugazi are probably too spicy as well. The Aleph ones would be getting much greater fireteam options in Pano than their native sectorial and the Fugazi is another very optimized profile that probably should get some more restricted options before going wildcard. I'd put Dragoes, Tik, Montessa and Bulletteers together in a Calvary duos. I think you're on the right track there that Pano could adopt a sort of Mechanized spearhead aspect. As Devils advocate, we already have are a nice home for tags, and the balance on that is tricky. I think a good balance point for Pano would be if you often bring 1 list with a Tag(s), but almost never both lists with tags.
@Domino25 I think you're right about Tikbalang getting Haris access might be too good, and restricting such fireteam to Duo would be good. Fugazi is there primarily to allow teams to drag a Repeater up the field as they advance, even if Regular FO can already deploy one. But as above, point taken. Aleph units should be getting that fireteam access to increase flexibility, allowing PanO to form some more versatile fireteams while keeping the units themselves more specialized. It's not breaking the game, especially since none of the units in question would have composition keywords.
@Stiopa I'll agree on the Aleph units, they would not be game breaking without pure bonuses. Transitioning back towards the original post, I think there is a conceptual dilemma on what Pano fireteams, and ultimately Pano should be. Getting mixed fireteams with full +3 BS back is a powerful tool for having price to ballistic skill value. The main offenders here are using things like a Karhu, Kamau, Orc or Aqulia in with fusilier type cheerleaders. I would go as far as to say it hands too much shooting dominance to Pano. Yes, Morats have it, but they are higher costed lower base BS with less access to mimetism or mimetism/visor combinations. It makes them "Shooty" but not necessarily out shooting Pano. A mixed Pano linked team with pure shooting bonus will be a better value than a Morat one. I do think the entire game is better off when a Fusilier HMG in a pure link has tradeoffs against a mixed link ORC HMG + 4 fusiliers or a Sapper MSR Regular can have tradeoffs against a Bagh Mari. The line of no return seems to be about signifcant cost difference amongst the link team, rather than a complete ban on mixing. That said, there is also a tradeoff on toolbox/vs pure that should be respected. It is my opinion that we should embrace the new fireteams, and expect toolboxy mixed links, contendership (but not domination) for most powerful links when the pure link price is paid, and push for more usage out of our low end shooters when boosted by pure fireteam bonuses. I don't expect complete unity, but it's worth airing our positions on this and getting a feel on what directions have support. I think one thing to keep in mind: Unless we get a compelling argument that pano needs a balance buff, expect any buff we sneak in via firetimes to be matched in other factions, particularly with top-end or optimized shooters. I am not without sin for seeking Pano power creep, so you can call my ideas out on it as well.
I fully agree. Current version of mixed fireteams gives PanO more versatility at the cost of (counting full core) +2 BS. It balances itself out nicely, especially since no one else has access to this old kind of a composition-keeping fireteam aside from Morats (who are balanced by the lack of cheap cheerleaders, even with Oznat/Hungries order battery), and inexplicable Volkolak/Rokot Core. Given the ability for most PanO sectorials to include Machinist in various links and move it up the field with them, I'd say that the default playstyle is supposed to be centered on the aforementioned combined arms, with increased number of HIs, TAGs, and Remotes. All factions can do it, but given the quality of these categories of PanO units it should fare well in this environment. Hence my idea of better Remote integration, to reinforce the theme.
I just read all the thread and find it very intersting and i'd like to give you my little thought. We all know that Pano can't have cheap skirmishers or smoke or more than average hacking or nasty peripheral. So give pano speed to improve his skill(ranged attack from unexepcted angles), remove more easily all the opponent's threat and be less predicatble. Tale the locust for example, give it mv 6-2 and climbing plus/super jump for example and is a different threat for the opponent(and please give wildparrot disposable 2). To improve hacking just give repeater to auxbot. Nothing too strange/exotic but for a few point we can expand our hacking range(i imagine someone else immagine that before me) And probably all the charachter that are below average and not played should be deleted but i prefer have less choice than a plethora of unused troops
@Doa I'd argue that Drop Bears and WildParrots aren't bad weapons, and each of them is present on three units in PanO roster, with Locusts having access to both. This particular unit's problem is that it's operating in the midfield with no Camo, which isn't a good place to be with direct templates being widely available. It might be less of an issue if they'd be cheaper or more durable. Another issue is how similar Nokken are, especially in vanilla and SWF, where they compete for the same role. To me it shows lack of creativity on the part of whoever was designing Nokken; it'd be great for the two of them to be set further apart. I'd make Nokken cheaper, and starting by looking at point formula - because when I'm looking at similar units something feels off. Locusts could stay the more expensive alternative, but get some skills to help them defend themselves, and to give them a slightly different role from Nokken. I'd go with Hidden Deployment and Surprise Attack, but without Camo. Speed, on the other hand, isn't that beeg of a problem for PanO. Quite a few units is faster than average (look at HI, for example), there are good - and durable! - bikes, point-efficient paratroopers, good combat remotes, including one with FD, sectorial have access to some better Camo Skirmishers, than vanilla - reaching opponent isn't that much of a problem.
The Locust fix is realllly easy, in my opinion: +3 and +1" dodge. It's a capable gun fighter who is going to die to templates 90% of the time, due to where it starts on the table. Giving it dodge on 15s would suddenly make templating one a more wasteful proposition, allowing it to duck back out of LoS, wasting orders. This would at least force a beserk or CC, where it's better-than-average capability would again stop it from being a cake-walk for the warband that's probably still gonna kill it. Its pointing still makes sod all sense to me (eg KH Locust is a point more expensive than a KH Malignos!), but I might be more likely to take it if it could dodge like a champ.
Call me old-fashioned, but i don´t like it when obvious weaknesses of units just get buffed away, because weakness sucks. If I want to play units without obviouse downsides i play nomads..... oh...wait :-D The fact, that Malignos is a HD Camo Regeneration unit should be hint enough, that there is no way to compare this two units in a vacuum. The overall unit roster of PanO/CA or Neoterra/Shasvastii is so different to each other, that there is not logical way to take 2 units, which happens to have infiltration and KHD and line them up to each other.
I think it's worth discussing the ideas of Holoprojector or Auxbot for Locusts. My opinion would be to tone down @AlphaStrike changes a bit though (Sorry Alpha!): Holoprojector - I think this would be rather strong; it solves a great deal of my concerns with the profile. The decoy effect makes it more difficult to remove. Marker state makes objectives, mobility and and getting into CC better. I'd personally like to see Surprise Attack added so it could be more potent in active and reliable in CC, but I would accept a veto on power creep reasons. Worth noting that due to holoecho effect in suppressive, it would very easily be able to get in suppressive fire with stacked -12 to hit over watching enemy troopers / DZ. That is a plus, but perhaps too much? Alpha strike suggested 1 use or limited holoprojecter, worth considering as a brake on the power creep. Auxbot - An infiltration heavy flamethrower attached to a -6 mimetism shooter is a new trick for us. There is possibility of getting closer to the DZ and dropping a template either with the infiltration roll or sneaky use of orders. The Aux bot would give a line of defense for the trooper and/or near by objectives. I think this another one where it's not a question of "is it good enough" but "is it too good". It seems pretty lethal, with improved but not infallible defense against being removed. For both: The point/swc pricing might be able to balance the strength. That said, I like how both options use established Pano technologies (on theme) but it also diverges from our normal pattern of "Tag/Link/Supertrooper with SWC shoots his way out of the DZ". This is a minor intrusion into a more board control or infiltrating alpha attack style without copy pasting other factions archetype.
Let me just quickly run that through the Nomad translator... here we go... ah yes: "avert your eyes, ye Pano peon! Be thankful that you get the frankly laughably overpriced Locust at all." :D When you say they're 'different', I completely agree. I chose the Malignos because that guy is in itself pretty expensive. Yet take away its best skills ("HD Camo Regeneration" as you point out), drop its WIP, increase its cost, and you get the Locust. Anyways, it was just a throwaway remark. If you don't like inter-faction comparisons that's fine, as long as you can admit that the Locust honks.
@Domino25 nice ideas, I like them both. Auxbot route would work great with PanO getting an increased roster of Aucbot choices, Locust would go well with a recon or infowar Auxbot. It'd allow Locust to hunt Camo units more effectively, or help block paths of advance of enemy heavies. Regarding its cost I think it's partially explained by its weapon loadout and high CC, problem is that high CC and decent CCW are bot enough to make a unit useful in CC, so they end up being a tax instead of tools. If they're to stay there it'd be good to go with the Holoprojector route, and maybe even giving it MA1. It'd still be pricy, but at least bow it would be able to defend itself, as well as reach that CC.
To clarify, Alphastrike deserves credit for the ideas. I just pulled them from his suggested change list, without some of the other changes he had for the Locust.
