Discussion in 'PanOceania' started by Context, Aug 14, 2019.
Thanks! I'll likely try to pick it up, then. Especially if I can resist the siren call of Varuna.
Concept of MO doesn’t gel with infinity: armor, stats, low order count, obvious expensive LT
All considered weak opposed to: skills, low price, high order count, cheap (for some even marker state) LT
Let’s be real.
I have a question about MO link:
BLACK FRIAR (Albedo, Biometric Visor L1) MULTI Rifle, Nanopulser, Drop Bears / Pistol, CC Weapon. (0 | 28)
FATHER-KNIGHT Missile Launcher / Breaker Pistol, DA CCW. (1.5 | 49)
FATHER-KNIGHT Missile Launcher / Breaker Pistol, DA CCW. (1.5 | 49)
KNIGHT OF SANTIAGO (Specialist Operative) Spitfire, Nanopulser, E/M Grenades, D-Charges / Pistol, DA CCW. (1.5 | 43)
KNIGHT OF SANTIAGO Lieutenant (Specialist Operative) Spitfire, Nanopulser, E/M Grenades, D-Charges / Pistol, DA CCW. (1 | 43)
5.5 SWC | 212 Points
Is this valid as link "Order Sergants" ?
No, you need at least one Order Sergeant, or a unit that counts as an Order Sergeant like Konstantinos, as per the latest FAQ.
Yeah lets, why does it work for some then?
Because they're not real? :D
Because good players can make worse armies work? This whole line of reasoning relies on the fallacy that somehow decision making isn't important in Infinity. No one is arguing that. The argument is that some armies outperform others when normalized for differences in player skill and meta, which is just an undeniable fact of any game where armies aren't perfectly equal in every way. (And the differential in Infinity is much lower than other tabletop games, but definitely still exists).
You are welcome to keep debating a strawman every time this comes up, of course, but you shouldn't expect other people to debate back from that point of view.
Damn! I'm not real? My whole life was in fact a lie?
To be serious, I think this is just a matter of feeling and how confident you are in what you do. @barakiel has already admitted that he doesn't see how to make MO work for him (correct me if I haven't understood this correctly). A lot of our forumers don't like to play with only 14 orders without the biggest stick of the table when playing any sort of PanO. And they aren't the kind of players liking to bully their opponent by using distraction Carnifex like MO can field in shitload. Maybe the tables they play on don't fit well too (I'm reminding someone telling us that he had to face TAK on a table opened like the plains of Poland with just catwalks stacked in vertical so he had to face 5 AROs stacked together just in order to leave his cover).
From my own experience, yes, MO are pretty difficult against armies which like to play defensive with wich the only moment their opponent's brain need to be really active is deployment in order to put down all the repeaters, mines, flashbots, TR bots and infiltrated hackers in the good spots to apparently lock down the table for about 2 turns and the cost of some troopers. But those armies always behave the same, regardless of the skill of the player. Placement will be better but fundamentally, there is really few differences. And MO has the tools to crack those bunkers. Yes, it requires a lot of skills, patience, carefulness against armies that spare this to their players. But because you can crack it sooner than expected and because those lists don't like to loose too early the two troopers designed to make the heavy lifting, MO can face them and win. Because we have beefy troopers, we can force some AROs that other armies wouldn't even dare to take. Need to find where is a Noctifer? The Seraph HMG is a good bait because it is even able to beat the bugger. If it lost, then it can't die on one missile and you can now send someone better to fitted to kill him or use the wreckage as total cover for moving. That's really extreme but this is the sort of move you can do in MO that you can't with other armies if you play 18 orders. Add to this all those stealthy troopers who shoot really well on their own, who can challenge speedbumpers like Libertos in CC instead of dumbly shooting it and the fact that we have access to the deadliest KHD in the game.
Yes, compared to some armies, MO is rather difficult to use well. It's really not for everyone. I don't know if it is for the worst because it's getting really boring to face game after game the same pattern, no matter what is the faction or the army. So, at least, MO forces a different approach. Is it artificial? In some ways, yes, but who is really guilty for this? CB that wants to see some variance in what people play even at high level? Or players who just don't want to change their habits once they have found one good way to play comfortably?
In my opinion, CB could do something to make MO easier for players with a lower level while still retaining this high potential when at the highest. A bit like what SEF proposes now.
LET ME JUST STOP YOU RIGHT THERE. AP+EXP does up to 3 wounds, which happens to be how many a seraph has. In addition, you do realise the noctifier user has no obligation to go after the first target you dangle at him, right?
This also sticks out as a load of wrong. With your sole sensor unit, that can't leave your DZ because of ARO threats? Spending orders to reveal markers you then have to kill? Yeah, surely better than say, vanilla panO or god forbid antipodes if we wanna discuss actually viable anti-camo platforms (I used the TAK to defeat the TAK, anyone?).
Yes, because cadmus, sheskiin in a link, camospam (see how marker state is a recurring theme in being strong?), gwailo links, yappers on tap, counterintelligence, easy-to-hide LTs, CoC if you use an agressive LT (for less than 55 points) is all equivalent to MO.
Yes, like I said, the Seraph won't die to one missile. Unsconscious is possible but dead? No. So you still can use his shadow to move your guys and send your Machinist repair it. Note also that while the possibility exists, it's really low (5,7%). And I'm not sure a lot of players will leave a Seraph HMG roam around like that. Even if it can't kill anything, the pilot inside can get objectives instead, well hidden by the silhouette of the TAG when dismouting. Even at WIP 10, when you have nothing else interesting to do, grabbing objectives is a good idea. And the fact that it's your TAG which get them changes your opponents plans.
With double discover thanks to Nanopulsers, Chain Colt or Flamethrowers on a non insignificant part of our troopers? I think that we can sweep the camo spam pretty well. Plus, the strongest part of camo spam is if you don't ignore them. Send a Magister to cross the camo field to clean the cheerleaders and I can assure you that camo troopers will reveal themselves faster that if you had used your sensor and your Fugazis. Then kill anything revealed and enjoy.
Different troops for different factions. The 57 points CoC is a BS 14 WIP 14 HI specialist with a heavy weapon before being a CoC. This guy, like the Santiago, can take objectives and fight in the same time. The whole thing of MO is this: your gun carriers do the scenario. In which world this order economy is garbage? MO is not centered around FT, and SEF can be really strong with just a Haris. MO is interesting because your core is strong enough to drag a lot of attention while you still can field one or two independant troopers with a big gun and the specialist trooper skill. This has a value. A value that few seem to see as enough to be played around. I, myself, had relied a lot on this aspect to win my games.
Well guys you can keelp arguing anout how good / bad MO are, but if you assume that Infinity is all about : cheap orders, hidden lt, camo and jammer then off course you won't like it.
Many pages have been written already about HI link team, about resiliance and how to stop cheap camo / warband with smart positionning etc ...
There is only on way to proove the point. Play some games (not just one).
On paper Japan rugby team was n° 9 and Ireland n° 2 in IRB ranking. Japan won 19-12.
Do you mean the one that is disadvantaged against a Surprise Shot Zero? (De Fersen)
The deadliest KHD rn is far and away the Haidao linked with the Tinbot Zuyong.
What if they played a hundred times though? I would take Ireland in 100 games. I'm not saying it's a fluke, I'm just saying something like a 45:55 split isn't really going to show in 1 or 5 games... In the other hand, if we see 5 games go 5-0 the odds of that happening by chance in an even matchup are less than 5% so it's pretty safe to say the winner of all 5 is better.
On the other hand, we can make the judgement that MO is underperforming based on amalgamated stats from all of ITS.
What about Santiago KHD, who doesn't need a FT to get a Tinbot and because of that, can use effectively Cybermask?
sooo...like every other KHD unit? Maybe you wanna talk about his HIGH WIP! Oh wait...or having sixth sense! oh wait...
Santiago are amazing units in MO, but would be dumped in most other sectorials. Says it all
Maybe the major problem with MO is the amount of changes between editions. Probably I'am wrong, but MO had some several changes from N2 to N3, no more Magisters five members fireteam. People rised his hands because of this, but them the magisters could do fireteam with the hospitalers instead. But now another big change came... Joan isn't anymore a good choice for a fireteam because the requirements, one casualty and your four member fireteam is no more, only a three member fireteam and probably your Lt in a dangerous spot, but one more time we have the magister core. Its look like "Corvus" hasn't a pretty clear idea of what or how to do with MO. And yes, this is a problem.
The past was better!! I think not, if we play LI then MO are pretty amazing, maybe not against IA, but against a lot of factions. Yes, hacking vulnerability... but how much for real? How many orders should expend a rival to isolate or imm one MO troup? Probably three or four at least... If LI they are a lot.
The other day I had a hard match against a friend. He beguns and we barely played my first turn. Yes, both played LI, IA against MO. It is MO nasty or bad? Not in my mind, only I had bad luck. The strategy was solid, but my ARO pieces get dow at first shoot. Having Armour 4 or 5 plus cover, and high CD plus fireteam bonuses, that is a strange case and not the regular in every match.
So, maybe MO needs some changes, but mostly it needs stability in order to allow the players create valid strategies.
He has a Tinbot Deflector L1. Haidao benefits from Deflector L2, which means he's always at minimum at the odds that the Santiago is at even with Surprise Shot. And is also about 10 points cheaper
Like, in terms of PanO KHDs, the Santiago is the best at stacking numbers. But in terms of the game, it's not the best hacker, I would take the Zero KHD as the best killer hacker in terms of price / performance anyday. The Kanren is a close second because forcing normal rolls is hilariously good.
What's the Kanren interaction there?
I want to believe this, but I've playing MO almost exclusively for two years and experience tells me things just don't happen like this. Or maybe they do, but you need some extraordinarily good dice rolls while expecting some extraordinarily bad rolls from your opponent.
Yeah, and in 2015, Japan beat South Africa. But as meikyoushisui mentioned, Ireland and South Africa would kick Japan's ass 9 out of 10 times. It just happened that, in both cases, Japan won the match that mattered the most.
I really don't understand why is everyone, claiming that MO are "good", not being objective.
I also play them from time to time, when I need a change of scenery, and do pretty well with them actually. But really don't claim they're a strong army. They're a hard mode army.
In the gamut of infinity armies, they are weak. And as I said before, that's mostly due to their "fundamentals" that don't gel with the infinity rule set at the moment.