Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm fairly new to infinity and dont have that much game experience yet and but Ive been doing a fair bit of reading about the game and listening to some podcasts and something I've heard a few players who havea good amount of games under their belt is t TAGs are a bit underpowered compared to other options... is there much truth to this? A shame if true, because they look awesome and id love to paint/deploy and play with these epic models!

Maybe Corvus Belle will rework their stats if they continue to under perform In tournaments and such I guess...

TAGs are fine (tohaa not included) but the have a steep learning curve and since they cost around a 3rd of your points. Can die just like every other unit if not supported right and people trend to think they can just Rambo up the field leaving their support behind. They trend to get a bad rep.

But, I can say with 99.9℅ certainty that if Lt. could score objective next ITS. That there would be a sharp rise in TAG use.

Lts used to be able to score objectives in ITS back in N2.

You saw a lot of Lt profile TAGs doing that back then. CB changed ITS for reasons.

I don't know about underpowered...they have the best stats and equipment of the single models in their factions.

A better description might be that a TAG will almost always be inferior to a similarly priced Link Team, at least in ITS. That Link Team, with bonuses, probably has similar BS, more versatile (but less powerful usually) equipment, similar staying power, provides multiple orders, and most importantly it can complete objectives.

Outside of ITS TAGs are much more viable. It's one reason that I don't like playing ITS.

It's not that TAG are bad is mostly that "human sized" TAG are really better
exemple: suiss guard HMG>cutter

the huge S7 and only 3 STR make them easy target

Noir wrote:
TAGs are fine (tohaa not included)

The Gorgos vulnerability is greatly exaggerated. It's got problems, but it's not unuseable. Personally, I've had a lot of success with it. it's main drawbacks are the inability to repair it and fire. The inability to repair it is a legitimate concern. Fire is entirely dependant on who you are playing, especially in a competitive setting - if they didn't bring fire, they can't go back and amend their list when they see a Gorgos. You can also give it a bit of protection with a Symbiobomb. Just remember it's a light TAG, not an MBT.

Noir wrote:
But, I can say with 99.9℅ certainty that if Lt. could score objective next ITS. That there would be a sharp rise in TAG use.

I'd say there's a 0% chance of that happening, considering it was already done, and was removed specifically because of things like Lieutenant Avatars and Achilles.

 -Loki- wrote:

Noir wrote:
But, I can say with 99.9℅ certainty that if Lt. could score objective next ITS. That there would be a sharp rise in TAG use.

I'd say there's a 0% chance of that happening, considering it was already done, and was removed specifically because of things like Lieutenant Avatars and Achilles.

You get that I know that and was using it as an example of why TAGs are not underpowered right? By point out that the reason they are not taking in ITS and yes if theystarted scoring again they would be taking aa lot more often.

TAGS are a victim of the game system itself really.

ITS favours order spam and linkteams for efficiency, and I have seen this feeding back into the armies people have been running in non-ITS games. Lots of 15+ order spam lists in pickup games that Ive seen this past year.

Also having a 2 story tall machine walking around in a game that lets people shoot the gak out of it with reactionary fire doesnt do it any favours either.

Down to it, for what TAG does and requires there are better synergies to be taken. It takes TO, ODD or other special rule to make them somewhat appealing. Before ITS, they were more common, however people weren't looking for the most optimal lists either.

Maybe Corvus Belle will rework their stats if they continue to under perform In tournaments and such I guess...

I find it not likely they'll re-do their profiles, changes from N2 to N3 are a strong indicator. New Seraph profile for instance also isn't that much of an improvement. I think they talked about how they didn't want the new players to go through TAG shock and feel there's little they could have done. The sum of N3 changes really does make a big challenge in getting a good value out of a TAG.

Perhaps we just need more variety in scenarios, then? Time to branch out from the ITS limits.

In the area control missions, TAGs do pretty well due to their manoeuvrability, firepower and ability to put a high points cost unit anywhere quickly.

However most people seem to go for the objective-heavy missions most often.

Dropbear Victim wrote:
TAGS are a victim of the game system itself really.

ITS favours order spam and linkteams for efficiency, and I have seen this feeding back into the armies people have been running in non-ITS games. Lots of 15+ order spam lists in pickup games that Ive seen this past year.

In those cases (I do it myself sometimes with spamislam) they often lack the punch needed to reliably take down a MBT. Sticking something like a Jotum or Guija or even a 360 visor Maghariba midfield in suppressive fire can cause serious headaches for it.

Dropbear Victim wrote:
Also having a 2 story tall machine walking around in a game that lets people shoot the gak out of it with reactionary fire doesnt do it any favours either.

Most TAGs aren't 2 story. The majority are around single story or just over, so hiding them isn't as hard as many people make out.

Ran a Maghariba Guard tonight in YAMS. It took 3 wounds T1 from McMurrogh. Engineer repaired it and it proceeded to hold down an entire half of the table.

TAGs have their uses but less so in ITS button mashing missions.

 -Loki- wrote:
Most TAGs aren't 2 story. The majority are around single story or just over, so hiding them isn't as hard as many people make out.

Not even that - commercial terrain is almost universally 75mm per storey, and S7 TAGs are 67mm high.

Is that from the ubquity of first Necromunda terrain in the mid 90s and more recently the Cities of Death ruins? The only counterexample I can think of is the stuff from Ainsty, which is 50mm high plus the thickness of the base you use.

Presumably. It certainly applies to most partner and non-partner Infinity terrain.

 -Loki- wrote:

Most TAGs aren't 2 story. The majority are around single story or just over, so hiding them isn't as hard as many people make out.

Well, its not difficult for them to get partial cover. But usually there are only a few places they can get total cover.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

Most TAGs aren't 2 story. The majority are around single story or just over, so hiding them isn't as hard as many people make out.

Well, its not difficult for them to get partial cover. But usually there are only a few places they can get total cover.

That's not a problem. TAGs should be able to find Total Cover, but they shouldn't be able to hide forever.