I think one of the best things that could be done for PanO would be to release new models for Peacemakers. They have always been amazing and I am surprised more are not using them. With new models (and potentially new profiles), may be they would get used more often.
Part of the issue and disconnect may be that if CB's in house vision of PanO is, "problem? Apply bullets. Problem still there? Apply more and larger calibre bullets," then folks who want something outside of that may always have a bit of disappointment waiting for them in PanO.
Perhaps you would be better served paying attention to the graffiti, then. @SpectralOwl and @Stiopa ’s advice here is excellent, and they know what they are talking about. None of the suggestions for containing scope, matching balance between game elements, or best communication of change suggestions are a personal attack. Learning how to scope ideas is part of being on a forum that the developers might actually read. Most of us have gone through the process of learning to do that, and also of learning to accept debate and criticism of the ideas we share here.
There is a very clear line between the constructive, inclusive and cumulative feedback of the many commenters and the entirely pretentious, dismissive approach others display. Personal attacks need not be intended or inferred for a lack of respect to be present. But it seems in the approach of subjective forum etiquette, certain people have forgotten their manners— and if elitism is the crux of forum inclusion, I simply won’t entertain it.
I don’t do statistical dilly dallying when considering anything in any game I play. I don’t go by feeling of play or positive/negative bias of experience, I trust in cold, hard mathematical statistics. Because of that I’ll take another tag 100% of the time over a Jotum, except in my brief SWA stint. Because they each have more to leverage against that constant AP weakness. In a mirror match I don’t want to be on the jotums side. Why? In a fictitious world where full burst meets full burst, a tik and a Jotum beating on each other Mano a Mano: The jotums inflicts one or more wound 22.91% to the tiks 27.12%. The next scenario is a lone overwatch using b1 missile launcher as an ARO, for shits and giggles let’s use a Swiss Guard. The jotum wins this fight and inflicts 1 wound 39.93% of the time. The tik wins it and inflicts one wound 42.82%. Those are the margins we are working with. Statistics matter in a game of chance, it’s how you leverage potential. The Jotum has ONE line of defence through a one dimensional standard and thus is a mathematical liability compared to every other TAG in the faction.
We can be offended back and forth, or we can collectively take a step back, and discuss constructively. I was asking about White and Foreign Companies, because of how they utilize same units in a slightly different enviroment. Argument about O12 being close in scope is also well made. As was mentioned, all these armies have access to alternative tools to guns, and if PanO is to be interesting it needs to shift this way - provide alternative ways to play, especially since faction's edge in firefights is razor-thin these days. MO is a good example of how this can be done, because it introduced quite a bit of new things for PanO: Proper warbands in form of Teuton/Magister merge. They can't provide smoke cover, but in return are much less sacrificial and more versatile unit than the usual "fragile Irregular trooper with Chain Rifle" template. They're good on their own merits, but also provide a guideline for PanO design space: more control, less, well, impetousness. Doctors and Engineers able to join a selection of Fireteams. They're still not the best battlefield support possible, but now they can be kept more to hand to be there when they're needed. Good bikes. PanO isn't necessarily lacking in decent flankers, but most of them are fragile. Montesa pushed up a flank and put into Suppressive Fire can be a serious distraction. They can also form Duo, which, as with Teutons, helps keeping them under control. HI paratrooper. It's only a single option, but it's a great toolbox in a faction which never got many of those. Good CoC. For all the criticism against CoC unit more expensive than the primary Lieutenant, I see KotHS as a much more interesting unit than LI/MI with CoC, designed to hang back and do absolutely nothing to draw attention. There's a big downside to the changes made, loss of the ability to disguise the knight as something unthreatening. I remember surprising my opponent with a "Machinist" flank raid at some point. PanO could use a native Holomask unit for mind games and misdirection. Knight Commander is too standard an approach, a unit which hides under Holo to defend itself, not to wait for a moment to strike. I'd really like to see more of the latter. TO infiltrators made into a separate, well equiped and armed unit - not new for PanO, but new for MO, providing decent screen for HIs. Serious mixed fireteams. The way various knights can be mixed, some of them with support troops and light backup as well, provides a much needed flexibility. All of the above improved the interaction between MO units, giving sectorial quite nice versatility. The main issue is the cost, but there's enough cheap units to deal with it. Bottom line is that MO has more ways to play after their rework, can focus on midfield, can effectively flank, can include some surprises, and is more of a CQB sectorial than the rest of PanO. And this predilection for CQB allows for interesting ways to play. I suspect that NCA will be the next PanO sectorial to get a makeover, and it's well positioned to get better Remotes integration and Aleph loaners, making it potentially pretty good when it comes to hacking - giving it a second emphasis aside from standard BS, just like MO's CQB focus I've mentioned. Peacemakers give it midfield Repeaters, more REMs in fireteams would improve this net, I can certainly see Danavas made available for PanO capital defense force - which would allow to avoid creating a PanO version of specialized LI hacker, just like Scylla does for Acon. Auxilia could get more Auxbot types. Aquila could be made into having more than one dimension - it'd make for a good command & control unit, for example (PanO C&C should be above average, tbh). Core of the sectorial is already very good. Check also what happens, when you're facing a unit with heavy weapon and MSV; not an uncommon sight, and one that renders Tik's Mimetism ineffective. Check how both fare in Suppressive Fire. Check them against E/M, also a more frequent ammo type. Take note of their weapon loadouts, because Tikbalang has no AP HMG outside MO, while Jotum sports both MHMG and Panzerfaust. And above all think about tactics and positioning, because in the game mathematics does not work in a vacuum, only provides you with a clue what is the probability of success of various actions. Argument from anecdote: recently I've played a game with MAF against QK. I've deployed a Bultrak as my last model, on a flank, vis a vis Sekban link and blocking their way. My TAG was shielded by a bulding from the rest of the table, and QK player was forced to engage it with the Sekban; otherwise in my active turn I'd go up that flank and through his DZ like a cabbage through a short crone. It took him entire turn, only destroying it with his last order, costing me only one model in the process, and leaving him wide open for my attack using other means. I've lost a TAG, it didn't kill a single model (did wound a Sekban at one point, but Haqq Doctor patched him up), but still won me the game. And if I'd have a Jotum there it'd survive to my turn, allowing me to proceed with my plan A. My point is that the fact that opponent will have AP weapons is only one part of a complex situation with many variables which cannot be described using math. That's why I'm saying tactics are so important. With a lot of AP on the other side of the table (and let's be honest, how many AP HMGs does an average list have?) you can hide TAG in total cover, defend with units which don't really care about AP - like TR Remotes and other light ARO troops - and in active turn act with Jotum in a way than minimizes risk and leaves it in position which can't be easily reached by AP weapons, forcing opponent to either spend valuable orders to reach it, engage with non-AP units counting on luck, or both. This is something that isn't described by pure numbers. Does not compute. So in the end I see no problem with us having different opinions on it. I disagree with your conclusion. While I would like to see some changes on some of PanO TAGs (starting with secondary armament on Squalo and Cutter), Jotum is not one of them.
I suspect price may play a role there; in their current box with one Peacemaker and an Auxbot they're visibly almost twice the real-world cost of Bulleteers, and REMs are already a fairly unglamourous unit mostly popular with top tournament players. I remember some of the older analytics (pre-Uprising) showing that even in tournament play, the atrocious Zhanshi was the most popular "cheerleader" in Yu Jing, a faction that has not only REMs but better LI for the job too. People do have a tendency to play what they can get without going too far out of their way, even if it slightly hurts their chances of winning. Access to ALEPH-level Hacking in NCA is a blast; towards the end of N3 we got the Deva Assault Hacker with Lightning for a while and it was a complete game changer. Weirdly enough I've always seen PanO C&C as the game's baseline; pretty much everyone else has had better WIP and special abilities since day 1 and outside of Joan the only PanO LT with any sort of bonus was the ORC HMG (1SWC discount). Even Nomads have better options than us, with high-WIP Hackers putting down White Noise or hiding under Cybermask. It's a bit of a take-it-or-leave-it for me; with good gunfighting on every unit we need Order shenanigans less than most, but with that advantage eroded with every passing release a few chances to try again wouldn't go amiss. At the least, however, the Aquila could use a LT version of its FTO profile- with that available, nobody's ever bringing a MULTI Rifle, much less making it their obvious LT.
My personal 2 cents on pano Command and Control is that we should lean on SWC discounts and bonuses instead the other C&C structures that are a strength of other factions. Pano's margin on having the top shooters is smaller, and probably should remain small for balance reasons. The more defining structure of Pano is that everyone has higher BS, and we have no smoke. As a result, having more SWC weapons fits the fact that we are already paying for those backup gunner's BS, and that we can't smoke to objectives if our shooters go down. I would argue that units like the MSV2 Crosier spitfire are very "thematic" to pano. That extra industrial might is used to outfit even line troops with nice weapons and visors. Having a bit more SWC, and leaning into more interesting light infantry troop visor/SWC options would leans into a professional army where everyone could be a shooter. I'd propose a more loose set of weapon options, such as Feuerbach or HRL for all light infantry types and maybe HMG Regular/Crosier options. I *think* it might not move balance too far, but I'd like to hear thoughts on that. EDIT: I'd clarify that I think Chain of command is a C&C skill we already have and should continue to have a sprinkling of, not to the point of being a faction strength, but as something often available if you go out of your way for it.
I wanted to make a comment about pacemakers and the rest of the specialty PanO rems that most PanO players forget they have repeaters and often disregard PanO hacking game because of low WIP when quantity has a quality of its own, but I am forced to say. Please stop attacking each other otherwise I will have to remove some sections of the thread, thanks.
As a Nomad main-er, I am deeply jealous of Peacemakers. Whenever I have gotten to play Pan O (borrowed armies and TTS), I go straight for those things before anything else when building my list (Acon with 6+ G:Synch bots was nasty before Scylla & Drakios got redesigned). They play the attrition game well, as well as the order-economy game. They help blunt alpha strikes nicely for their points cost. And in both roles, they work well in a 5/10 order pool split in N4, places in the 5-troop group. They are deeply annoying barriers/distractions when one is trying to just savage the other player’s main order pool, and can still be a threat in their active with just 3-4 orders to power them. If NCA got Devas in links again, Peacemakers could be nastier than Morans. Beltalowdah got to get me some of them. Hmm… *plots in larcenous Nomad*
That’s the heart of Pan O well-described, and good design to support it, right there. YJ have (and need) the slight C&C advantage. Pan O have slightly superior dakka, matched with more widely available visors. This is perhaps even better expressed in N4 than ever before. I do think that measures needed in the game as a whole (reigning in DTW spam availability) would also help emphasize these advantages of Pan O’s too. They’re in a good place to benefit from the fixes that the game needs in general.
@Domino25, @Savnock - Increased number of Multi Rifles/Multi Marksman Rifles, including on units which don't usually get such weapons. Multi Rifle Fusiler, Multi Marksman Akal, etc. This would give armies increased access to special ammo, some better ARO options, as well as range. Additionally there's a number of weapons proposed in the original post, like more types of Breaker and Nano weapons. This can be combined with the notion of slightly expanding PanO Remote options, for example Bulleteer/Peacemaker/Pathfinder with Multi or Breaker weaponry. And I really think that more PanO units - especially Characters and TAGs - should get Multi Pistols. Especially since its sculpt is excellent.
I'm still willing to fight over my "hill" that Pano should get more swc options per troop type and LT options with +1 swc. That said: I agree and would be happy with this, Multis would be 2 points more than a combi? To keep it focused on the original post, I think Breaker/Nano/EM weapons suggested could all be introduced in a fairly balanced and thematic way. I am less sure about some of the more sweeping changes, and some of the more potent Aux bot options.
I'm not arguing, I also think it's a good idea for a slightly different C&C boost, and it does fit PanO as we know it. My concern is this: it doesn't really solve the issue of PanO play being too one-dimensional. Getting more heavy weapons at the cost of obvious Lt. still means having to focus mostly on move+shoot, while not really solving the issues with underutilization of Auxbots, or bland Characters.
If you accept our hacking quality is in quantity then SWC is one of our limiters on hacking. Killer hackers are SWC free, but are not cheap since they come on MI or better and are more of a target then a defense against high bts/firewalled nomad types. Our guided game is pretty risky since you need a quantity of swc in hackers, and then another 1.5 for the missile, again SWC bound when you try to add big guns for ARO or busting out of the DZ. That said, when it comes to missions where you need to get somewhere without shooting everybody in the way, I propose our answer is marker states. TO Camo exists and makes due for us but is point expensive. Holo-Echo and cybermask seem like the overly technical solution (I call that theme) that could be easily affordable in points. For example I'd say something like the Infirmarer, would be drastically improved with Holo-Echo & Surprise attack. Its middle of the road BS, CC and WIP become a neat package if you add a limited -3 to ftf and the shell game to move into base to base or objectives. We definitely still suffer on order efficiency and marker states are vulnerable to that because they to be applied or reapplied. I don't have great answer there as I think Tac Awareness, NCO/LT2, Strategos are not really our things to go crazy on. Joan helps with coordinated orders, but at the cost of DRASTICALLY shaping the list. *shrug* I don't know. Finally...we have some decent characters, they're not all bad. A few need tweeks, but I generally prefer when characters are more about fluff than optimization. At some point, the prevalence of Joan of Arc in vanilla lists becomes a joke if you think about it in "theme".
SWC is a serious limiter for PanOceania, +SWC LTs is a solution, lowering SWC is another solution, both together can be a solution too, but it is a patch, not a solution, they can be part of a solution though.
Good thing is it'd allow for easier fielding of EVO Mulebot, which is often overlooked as a force multiplier. I'll repeat myself, if PanO will ever get a dedicated hacker specialist, I hope it'll have an EVO option, just like Scylla. Agreed about Strategos and TacAware, but I'd argue that NCO and Number 2 should be somewhat more frequent in an army that is a regular, professional military force. They're definitely not all bad. Knight characters are very cool, MI characters are a mixed bag, Uma and Gunnar are ok, Singh and Rao need changes, and so do Bipandra, Konstantinos, and Quinn. Right now they're simply a slightly better versions of their base units, what they need is to be more unique, and bring tools that allow to use them differently.
Bipandra did mean a bit more when Paramedic was still less reliable, but she probably does need a bit more to stand out now. Quinn... I got nothing. He's just really bland even for when he was designed, and probably evidence that PanO may need a secondary field of excellence outside of "BS Attack" if only for the designers' sake, since CB must have been scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with that for a Dire Foe, historically some of the most creative low-power Characters. After thinking for a bit, a Sectorial properly designed around combined-arms, Infinity style, could be fun- leaning into PanO's quality TAGs and the best support we can give them. We'd need a cheaper light TAG somewhere to pull it off, but either NCA or Acon could easily fit this archetype without losing their existing character. Varuna would need work, but would probably benefit most from another way to play.
Bipandra's issue is that she's a standard WIP 13 Doctor that pays for multiple different statline increases - CC, PH, ARM, BTS - which have no impact on her role, don't provide her with any gameplay options. It speaks volumes that the most interesting piece of kit she has is Nanopulser. In Quinn's case I can see the upside of being able to include a BS 13 Shock Marksman with MSV in a Fusilier link, but that's all he does. This is exactly the problem mentioned before, all he adds to the faction is another gun, with absolutely no modification to gameplay. He could get downgraded to a Fusilier loadout with Marksman Rifle and MSV1, and it'd change nothing. When presence of a unit - even more so in case of character - changes nothing in the game, what's the purpose? I think Acon can already pull it off, due to their TAGs being a bit cheaper, and the ability to include Machinists in both main freteams. Tikbalang is probably as cheap a TAG PanO will get, at least for the foreseeable future.
