Keeping the hackers near the tag doesn't help when pitchers start raining in. Adding an additional cost of 37 points and 1 swc to a tag goes right back to what I've said before about this whole issue some 20 pages ago. The more you have to invest in something to make it work, the worse it is. For 37 points and a swc I can take a kamau hmg and a flashbot and just do the thing I need my tag to do, probably better. Total control is horrendous. It completely obliterates your ability to establish your own deployment zone at the cost of your own models. Its been stated time and again, good hacking factions have better tools ontop of better hackers ontop of better programs that creates a stacking effect. Pitchers have a bad habit of being married to really good hackers that don't cost all that much making really efficient choices. We keep circling around on points while trying to get you guys to look at a specific issue but we have to keep getting dragged off into the minutae of deployment, board design, terrain design, shooting strengths and weaknesses and mish mash selections of units from different sectorials to try and fix the issue and anecdotes that are wildly unhelpful. PanO across all of its iterations averages somewhere around a mid to low 40s percent win rate. Do you want us to advocate to give PanO a little boost or advocate dragging everyone down? CB aren't some god tier game designers with perfect balance. Most of the balance of infinity goes back to its core mechanics which provide a stellar way to push and pull around any number of issues. N4 has honestly been pushing that to about the limit. Hacking and CC are awful compared to the way they worked in N3 because it is just a tier system now. Hacking factions stop PanO from hacking, but PanO doesn't stop other factions from shooting. I dont know why you can't see how the tools available to hacking factions in this game don't blow PanO hackers out of the water. I dont know why you think bringing units to die or be disabled to these hackers is a good idea. I dont know why you think spending twice as much on something is better than just opting out and investing in something that works. I dont know how to get past the assumptions that because PanO has hackers that it is good at hacking and that hacking is a balanced playing field.
Hi Diphoration, these numbers look wrong, assuming the zero actually gets its surprise attack. Wip 13 trinity with surprise attack into wip 12 oblivion through a repeater comes out 50.4/36/13.6% for B2, and 30.2/48.5/21.4% on B1. Assuming the initial round goes in the zero's favour and one fusi drops, as the numbers actually suggest, the subsequent round is 56.35/28.1/15.6%. It looks like two-three orders would be the average outlay to drop them both, with some risk involved for your 22pt unit. Of course I know what an opportunity cost is, I was just discussing it with you! A bit of charity would go a long way in heated discussions like this. I get your position – you think 1swc and 30pts is a low opportunity in a Pano list and I don't agree: I was arguing that if you actually go down this route, a third fusi hacker would be wise, to make an obvious KH play less viable, at which point you're 45pts and 1.5swc into this build. Either way, I don't think it's right to downplay swc in pano listbuilding. (That whole discussion was separate to my original point regarding introducing more risk into what is already a dicey matchup for Pano.) Finally, it doesn't have to be into Zeroes if you want. The KH skirmisher is a generic profile in Infinity - call it a Zulu, Ninja, or Shrouded if it helps. PS there's no need to sign off with shouty caplocks and bold text, it's a bit rank eh?
My reference was to 6th and 7th, who were better editions in all regards compared to 8th except what comes to the magic phase and it’s feast or famine approach. I think that the numbers of @Diphoration were more close to the case were the fusilier hacker is included in a Core and therefore obtained Sixth Sense. Although I am afraid @Diphoration mistakenly thought that Trinity has a value of 13 for its damage instead the right amount of 14. The right numbers of the Trinity Zero/Ninja/Anything that is a WIP 13 KHD with no BTS that walks into a Pano Repeater and proceed to Trinity the two fusiliers in the core is and is splitting its R into 2/1 is: 43,93% to cause 1W or more to the fusilier who is assigned 2B 21,27% to get Isolated by the fusilier that is assigned 2B 26,06% to cause 1W or more to the fusilier who is assigned 1B 30,96% to get Isolated by fusilier that is assigned 1B leaving the Zero/Ninja to a 45'64% chance of getting Isolated all together, and he having a 11.44% of wounding both fusiliers, although it is true he has a 58.54% chance of wounding at least one fusilier. Although a better program to choose in this case by the fusiliers is not oblivion, but carbonite. Yes, it does not absolutely stop cold the Ninja/Zero in that run, leaving the option to activate him again to declare reset... but realistically speaking that is an order sink and if he is still under the ZoC of the repeater is an invitation to get hacked again to get the double state of Inm-B and Isolated: 43,93% to cause 1W or more to the fusilier who is assigned 2B 22,90% to get Inmobilized-B by the fusilier that is assigned 2B 26,06% to cause 1W or more to the fusilier who is assigned 1B 33,50% to get Inmobilized-B by the fusilier that is assigned 2B leaving the Zero/Nija to a 48,72% chance of getting Inmbolized all together, and he having a 11.44% of wounding both fusiliers, although it is true he has a 58,54% chance of wounding at least one fusilier. But yes, I am with you @Time Bandit. If using the humbles Fusiliers/Keisotzus/anything with WIP 12 and 0 BTS I prefer to have 3 of those in the core instead of 1 or 2. Because even if they're extreme low quality hackers, the sheer number of them paired with sixth sense thanks to the core, makes them resilient to the "walking into your own repeater by a KHD with suprise attack". In fact a 1,76% chance of wounding the three fusiliers, with a 67,09% chance of being Isolated or a 70,59% chance of being Inm-B.
Thanks for the clarification Rabble, good points all. Yeah, 3 mook hackers is a weird little list that people don't often expect! It does have a serious swc cost however, making it better suited to things like O12 imo.
For Starmada the number are slightly better, as the Kappa hackers have WIP 13 and they are essentially opportunity risk free compared to a regular Kappa apart from the SWC. Although to be honest in Starmada my usual combination is 2 kappa hackers and 1 Cyberghost. The latter is not included in the core of course, but BTS 6 and WIP 14 do work in his favour and he is bringing White Noise, Cybermask and pitchers so it is worth taking the risk.
Apestrong went 4th in Cyberbaltic 2023 using vPanO. https://infinitytheuniverse.com/gam...JAfPGL55H0d-h5k6IjIM_bE8DUMczH126Sx7JrM-mGxlw His list has a strong GML game using Croc Man FO (read:deployable repeater -> unblockable alpha strike attack vector, the best of infinity) and Croc Man Hacker.
Have done this for the lolz of it, can confirm it’s fun. Did get unlucky when I ran into Nourkias though… that got messy. Wasn’t paying attention to where he was (he’d been left in a corner of the objective room that that I couldn’t easily see). Oh well. Very cool. Will have to look at this and give it a try.
Is there a way to see the lists of the tournament? You can see quiet a lot of the players, but I could not find the lists themselves. Those lists would give quiet the insights
The PanO list. Hopefully I'm not breaking some infinity community rule by posting it. ZQpwYW5vY2VhbmlhE1Bhbk9fMV9DeWJlcl9CYWx0aWOBLAIBCAEWAQMAAhYBAQADhc0BAwAEHgECAAUQAQEABg0BBgAHhMYBCAAIhh0BAwACBwENAQQAAoXNAQUAA4XcAQEABIYgAQIABRIBAQAGhiIBBAAHhh0BAwA=
We discussed his list and vPanO and agreed that PanO isn't a TAG faction. The uninteractive deployable repeater trick is there to kill those other troublesome ARO pieces that would be difficult to kill with BS attacks.
You can at minimum double stack the buildings and get enouph verticality, the tower is taller than that. Why would you have your two hackers in zone of control of your TAG when you can simply have your repeater and a well hidden one, or one at silhouette contact with the TAG preventing it to be a bigger problem? Regardless, Total control works for everybody, if I manage to take over a Marut for 3 turns I see no issue beyond the fact that a player with good hacking was not prepared to be on the receiving end of the hacking... I honestly do not know were the debate should go, the hardline stance is if you are not Nomads level of hacking you are nothing, not a healthy mindset, so what make everybody Nomads? ruin Nomads because reasons? PanOceania has a good repeater network in its remotes and these remotes will by definition advance as their main purpose is to fight, their hackers are average with relatively good BTS and some tricks like camouflage and surprise attack, Airborne deployment, combat jump infiltration or tinbots, they have relatively good killer hackers and most of their "good" hackers are not bad in normal combat. They have a distinct lack of pitchers, as most factions do, and not many extra hacking programs, if any (De Fersen only?), does this makes them bad at hacking? On a side note what I gather is pitchers to be the biggest gripe everybody seems to have.
PanO_1_Cyber_Baltic ────────────────────────────────────────────────── GROUP 1 6 2 2 AUXILIA (Lieutenant) Combi Rifle / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0.5 | 14) AUXBOT_1 Heavy Flamethrower / PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 4) AUXILIA Combi Rifle / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 14) AUXBOT_1 Heavy Flamethrower / PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 4) KARHU Feuerbach(+1B), AP Mines / Pistol, CC Weapon. (1.5 | 35) TEUTONIC KNIGHT Light Shotgun, Panzerfaust ( | TinBot: Firewall [-3]) / Pistol, DA CC Weapon. (0 | 20) PATHFINDER DRONBOT Combi Rifle, Flash Pulse / PARA CC Weapon(-3). (0 | 15) CROC MAN (Forward Observer) Combi Rifle, Flash Pulse, Shock Mines ( | Deployable Repeater) / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 31) HELOT MILITIAMAN (Camouflage [1 Use]) Submachine Gun, Light Rocket Launcher / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0.5 | 9) MOTORIZED BOUNTY HUNTER Red Fury / Breaker Pistol, PARA CC Weapon(-6). (0.5 | 16) GROUP 2 5 2 3 CROC MAN (Hacker, Hacking Device) Combi Rifle, Shock Mines ( ) / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0.5 | 34) KARHU (Paramedic) MULTI Rifle, Blitzen, AP Mines ( | MediKit) / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 28) LIANG KAI Chain Rifle, Light Shotgun, Flash Pulse / Pistol, EXP CC Weapon. (0 | 21) DIGGER Chain Rifle(+1B), Grenades / Pistol, AP CC Weapon(+1B). (0 | 14) CLIPPER DRONBOT Missile Launcher / PARA CC Weapon(-3). (1.5 | 16) BEASTHUNTERS (Surprise Attack [-3], Camouflage, Forward Deployment [+8"]) Heavy Flamethrower(+1B), Panzerfaust, AP Mines / Pistol, DA CC Weapon. (0 | 17) MOTORIZED BOUNTY HUNTER Red Fury / Breaker Pistol, PARA CC Weapon(-6). (0.5 | 16) 5.5 SWC | 300 Points Open in Infinity Army I felt free to copy it into something more easy to read
On another note and answering to @Judge Dredd statement about total control being "horrendous". To ensure your tag does not cause mayhem in your own DZ after being possesed by an alpha strike pitcher+totalcontrol from absolutely out of sight, is to have one of your own models in base to base contact with such TAG. By rules, the very moment the TAG is possesed he is now an enemy model, and he is contact with one of your models, and therefore they're engaged. So your enemy can only declare Dodge or CC Attack in order to disengage and start causing mayhem. Taking in account the horrendous Dodge roll of a Tag, or the usually mediocre CC Attack value of them, chances are that they're going to take more than one order to disengage. And as long as you're having a repeater nearby, you will be able to ARO him with your own hackers back into your control with more Total Control programs. And one of the nicest and cheapest models to do this? The humble peripheral servant of your own engineer. Only 3 pts cost, and armed with a Para (-3) Weapon.
I've brought this up before, but it has a big problem- having a piece in Template range renders the TAG vulnerable to GML strikes, since it can't share its ECM. If the opponent doesn't have a GML though, this plan is great. Try to have the actual Engineer nearby if you suspect the opponent will go for that play, because delaying a TAG is not kind to your Servant Bot's health and you'll probably have to fix that TAG soon.
That Baltic PanO list is pretty surprising. I am always happy to see people approach the game differently. How many hackers is the right balance? I can see one or two (1 HD and 1KHD), but it seems some have found success with more. I also think it matters if they have a Camo state as well.
Engineers can have up to 2 of such servants. You can always have the spare servant close enough to the TAG to patch him up, or your own very engineer relatively close as well. And even if the enemy chooses to Spotlight your remote instead of your TAG you're still in a positive situation compared to a Total Control TAG in your DZ. Having 3 points of STR it is extremely unlikely the TAG is going to fall unconcious to a single GML targeting the servant peripheral bot, and you're having the incredible nice situation of being able to declare dodge with your TAG to avoid the damage, and declare reset with the servant that is targeted. What usually is going to happen is that the servant is going to die, but it never hurts to try the reset just in case he does not die. So your enemy will find himself in the position that the TAG is still alive, and he needs to reapply the spotlight program again but now against the TAG. So let's think the order cost opportunity of this approach instead, assuming the enemy does not fail any roll: Total control approach: 1 order for the pitcher 1 order for total control hacking program 1+ order for causing mayhem into your DZ In potentially 3 orders your enemy is now severely hampering your army. And in case you're unable to regain control he can spent more orders to cause even more mayhem. Guided GML approach to the servant bot: 1 order for the pitcher 1 order for spotlight hacking program unto the servant bot 1 order for GML unto the servant bot 1 order for spotlight hacking program unto the TAG 1+ order for GML unto the TAG In potentially 5 orders your enemy has now made your TAG fall unconcious. Which is exactly one more order than the ideal case scenario of 4 orders to make the TAG unconcious/killed. (pitcher + spotlight + gml + gml) So with 3 points invested, and no order economy risk from your part, you have gained 'protection' to Total Control and you're offering a less efficient route of alpha striking your TAG, than the direct approach of just spotlighting him from the beginning. Mind this the above scenario assumes that the enemy is rolling right. In reality the probability and mechanics of the FtF of spotlight vs reset really mean that he is usually spending significant more orders to kill your TAG by spotlighting the servant rather than just spotlighting your tag.. and it is giving your TAG a 'free' dodge in the first GML that is targeting your servant, since in essence your TAG just declared reset as the spotlight is going to go down with the death of the servant.
For me, one hacker, one killer hacker is the base minimum, two hackers and a killer hacker are what I try for.
PanO is not about S-tier profiles like vCA but cheapish A-tier profiles. You are taking a big risk against the S-tier hacking factions if you include any non-camo hackers. Hidden deployment is the way. Non-camo hacker needs to be broken good to be included like Bit & Kiss.
Yep. Its the goto counter. Its also easy to carbonite and kick it, but it does tax more orders from the whole deal.
