[krysto2002]

In a vacuum, the differences are pretty subtle, but when brought into context the real differences are in terms of offense, defense and synergy.

Offensively, the Omnicrons benefit from buffs more than the Agents, every bonus die doing double the work, with the potential to pull of six-skull rolls with only +2 attack, whereas a Microcorp in the same position can max out at 5 skulls, requiring all 5 dice to show skulls. Sure there's more consistency in rolling averages with Microcorps, but the boom/bust of Omnicrons can earn their 100 points back far faster than Microcorps, or so one would imagine at least.

Defensively, Omnicrons get all the boons/banes of being a Soulborg, though this isn't very frequently relevant, while the MCAs have a 30% change of dodging literally any wounds, meaning that in a pinch, an MCA is far more likely to survive than a Sniper - they certainly have quite a lot more staying power.

Synergy-wise, the MCA get Skahen's Cover Fire bonus movement and Laglor's Range+, the Omnicrons get Gilbert's Movement bonus and Repulsor's Attack+. Extending to C3G/SoV, MCAs get Elaria's +5% bonus to dodging and the Omnicrons get Omegacron, which is by far the more relevant of the two. This is mostly up to build preference, with no real favor to either, but given custom synergies the Omnicrons get one heck of a boon.

Really, when it comes down to the wire, I prefer the simplicity of Omnicrons to the Microcorps, since the slew of abilities aren't relevant enough for me to care (that and Omnicrons are quiet a lot easier to get a hold of). If every map had water hexes on height, then perhaps the MCA would be better, but I just don't see sending my high-value ranged squad down the river being a smart move no matter how you try to justify it.

Favor: Omnicrons, if only because I think they're cooler and easier for new players to grok.