No, but it does wave wildly and scream there might be a problem over here. If it's okay for models to out perform their points, and have an outsized impact on the game, then why use points? Now I agree points aren't the only thing, and not necessarily useful at determining gross details. You should be surprised when a slightly cheaper model out performs a more expensive one. There is reason to havecheap models that "trade up" in game design. However, in the case of the Mutts they are super cheap, and can easily disable take out TAGs and other things 20x their cost. The counters to them are limited, and make it too challenging to prevent an uneven swap. Generally models that are allowed to trade up, also need to be less resilient, making them more glass cannon. But the Mutts avoid that by using a weapon that does not require LOF, allowing them to take advantage of full cover in a manner in which none of the other warbands can do. You'll noticed that the models that have gotten Jammer since have been much more expensive than 5 pts (29 points for Echo Bravo, 23 for Hecklers). I honestly don't intend to pick on Mutts, as you said, it's off topic, I was just giving an example of something in the game, that people use, that might be unbalancing, yet not to the point that it results in everybody playing just Haqq. Yeah, but that's not what I want or said. Please re-read my statement. To be honest with you, you continue to miss basic stuff like this, or ignore things that conflict with your already held opinion, as such I really don't care if you're not convinced. Further you're not really adding anything to this discussion, other than I don't get it, and I don't believe it. Can be. I think we can agree on that. Can be a problem, like a lot of things that you can waster orders on. I would not be using this tactic in a limited insertion list in Aleph for example. However if I'm running a 20 order horde it's very valuable. HVT must be placed 4" outside of deployment. That means that a cheap MI, deployed in b2b with the HVT can be placed on the back edge of the deployment with 3 orders, and in most cases you don't need to go that far. Generally back around the corner behind a building or two is enough to force your opponent through some trickly AROs, and make the six HVT based classifieds harder to achieve. Further more, since you're move the HVT back into your DZ, you can force them through more short ranged cheap AROs like DTWs and the like.
@RogueJello I'm not interested in debating the efficacy of Mutts with someone on the internet. I'm not going to change your mind & you're not going to change mine. However multiple people will tell you that your position is invalid. Is a mutt that much worse than getting a shaolin monk into CC with your Swiss Guard? One costs 5 points and the other 60+ but that monk will shut the SG down very effectively. If mutts have you down look to add some veteran troops or some troops with stealth to your bag of tricks. Setup ARO's so they can't just run across the board and lock down zones for "free" We've answered the OP, and this is now just another thread complaining about unit costs that a particular player doesn't understand. I'd suggest the thread simply be closed.
Or just shoot it with anything over 16”. Problem solved. You can even do it in ARO. To be honest with you @RogueJello, the reason I may not understand what you're saying is because you haven’t built a credible, legible argument. You seem to be actively ignoring most of my posts if you think that’s all I’ve said. What was a decent discussion about templates and HVTs, has been lost because you chosen to die on a hill built up by fallacious rhetoric. Instead of worrying about corner case rules, (or, at best, tactics that will fail to increase your chances of winning a game), just take the time to play. The more you practice, the more confident you’ll be when facing a variety of opponents. Spending a minimum of 3 orders to perform this tactic deprived you of a large number of better plays, even if running a 20 order list. It’s not a value play. At best, it could be used out of desperation? At that point you’re already loosing, so more things will have to turn the table for you than this.
Using the HVT as a meatshield can be useful from time to time but it's not very interesting as like, part of your game plan. There's so many catches to it: can't be impetuous, can't be a marker, can't be a remote, can't be in a link, can't co-ordinate orders, have to roll casevac... You trade so much away even before you start moving. It seems like Achilles could use the Xenotech to zone out flamethrowers, but other than him idk who else would make it part of their playbook.
Yes, the Mutta is much worse for the Swiss. I'm working under the assumption you aren't letting my Shaolin teleport assault through walls, of course.
Get's worse if it's a Swiss hacker. The Jammer + KHD one-two vs enemy hackers is nauseating. Seriously, make Jammers Comms Equipment already.
Maybe, but what I continue to see is basic questions from you, and failures in reading comprehension. Such as? In all circumstances? Against all lists? Can you show your work here? I've already agreed that not all tactics are valid in all circumstances, so please explain why this is always a bad idea.
A. Only if that's all the Swiss needs to do B. Shaolin has nothing it can do to a Swiss in reactive turn that Mutts do not have a better option of regardless of A. The comparison to Shaolin is a (bad) strawman that doesn't help your point.
There's an exponential amount of viable options. Any way you are moving on an objective or reducing your opponent's order pool is more effective. A few people have gone over this already. You seem to be missing how this game works. Maybe its that reading comprehension you're talking about? You've still ignored most of what I've posted here. The only semi-reasonable argument I've seen against the Mutt thus far is for the potential to turn the jammer into comms equipment. This could be ok at best. Real-world jammers aren't usually hackable, so its always been justifiable imo. As to the Swiss Guard argument, I fail to understand why you can't shoot the mutt from more than 16"? Or stealth past?
Depends on who's Mutta we're talking about. You absolutely can't shoot Stockholm's highest ranked player's Muttas from further than an E/Marat away. Different story for us lower ranked players'. I think for Mutta the argument is not about whether they have a consistently very high return on investment, but let's leave that for a different thread.
That’s not a flaw with mutts. if you can’t shoot a high skilled players’ pieces it doesn’t matter what they are, the problem is you. Frankly if you see a comparison between two cheap war bands who excel in trading up as a straw man that tells me a lot about how his thread is going to go
Look, mate, the reason what you wrote is a strawman is that you were setting up a situation where the biggest problem with getting the Shaolin into position was waived. It was frankly a laughably unrealistic comparison. As to shooting an exceedingly skilled player's trooper, here's the thing; he can't do it without Jammers.
And what is that biggest problem? Tear down my argument by all means but just calling it a straw man isn’t an effective way of doing so. You don’t like ghazzi and that’s fine. I’m not going to defend them more than I have as I’m not going to change your mind but now I’m prepared to engage to try and improve my arguments in the future - where exactly does my comparison break down? If all you can do is reference logical fallacies in passing without justifying your position you’re completing a LF of your own...
Ghazi can attack at range without LOF with high relevant attribute. That's the problem. They can even do so against Camouflage Markers using an Entire Order. Shaolin are good in melee, but they need to make it there which is a lot shorter range than ZoC, and Engage is a travesty of an ARO which makes their order-wasting potential much lower than a Ghazi. It's all the jammer, mate. Everything else about Ghazi are standard warband stuff where they trade the traditional melee threat for more varied direct templates that means they are capable of being a very, very, serious threat to HI and TAGs. You can't simply face tank a Ghazi template, regardless of who you are, just like you can't simply face tank a Shaolin melee (well, a TAG can for a few orders) or a Morlock melee. Maybe Ghazi without Jammers would be 4 points. That would probably be fine. But as soon as you add the Jammer you have a unit capable of stopping almost any unit in game and forcing them to require Engineer attention. Do we need to mention that Yu Jing and above all else Pan-O has a bit of a logistical and will problem when it comes to fixing this. The only way I see making Jammers a reasonable weapon is to stop treating Veteran as a special and rare skill. Start seeding it all over the damned place, because that would make sense. Everyone in this setting will generate troopers capable of operating without constant supervision. It's otherwise like hackers versus HI. Everyone is capable of fielding LI, SK or MI that can't be hacked, even IA are, but far from everyone can field units immune to Isolation, let alone several different such units. Or make Jammers exceedingly rare, which means remove them from anything with non-binary AVA. Or make it an indiscriminate circular DTW. That'd be interesting come think of it.
Adding to this since it seems to not have come up. Ghazi has jammer AND E/Marat. therefore, when in range, and you declare your aro, they pick the one you didnt aro against as one requires a dodge, the other a reset. So yeah....
No, but then spammy Haqq lists would have to actually interact with their opponent, and everyone knows that's a sucker's game! The fact that they aren't Comms Equipment seems like it's a serious rules oversight, or someone at CB is set on making elite armies a "wrong" choice in an ivory tower game design sort of way.
the point is that a "cheap" unit can disable a really expensive unit "easily" the specifics of how its done is highly irrelevant as the game is full of ways to solve that problem as long as you're able to make it happen on the tabletop as a player. The monk / morlok can almost completely disable an avatar by simply walking into it. The ghazzi can almost completely disable an avatar by simply parking near it. The specific application of how these pieces are able to accomplish their goal is basically irrelevant. Thus my argument hardly fails as a straw man. Use the correct tools to eliminate the threat, keep an engineer around to fix isolation. Learn to solve the problem rather than complaining the problem exists as the game designers & many members of the community view your "problem" as a feature. kinda like how most chainrifle wielding warbands also have pistols & good CC stats to force a bad decision? Don't send an expensive HI to dig out a Ghazzi, send a line trooper and remember that isolated troops still count as points in zones so its a better outcome than a bullet to the face.
They'll just chain rifle the line trooper. I've played in games where it wasn't really a problem to solve - the Ghazis were tucked behind a u-shaped solid block on one side of the objective, able to Jam anything that came near it while being unable to be attacked from my side of the table. Making Jammers Comms Equipment would go a long way towards solving this, but I bet some players would cry foul that they have to deal with that, when they expected Ghazis to be braindead pieces that always traded up for little effort.
Other factions have access to Jammers on great profiles. I've played against them with no issue. So can Smart Missile Bots. Oh, and they can do it with bonuses galore. Triggering a Face to Face roll isn't interacting? Making your opponent problem solve isn't interacting? How so? (Rhetorical; You are 100% wrong on this). Here's the rules for Jammers, so we can all be on the same page (bold script for emphasis): This Technical Weapon doesn't require LoF and acts in the user's Zone of Control, inducing the Isolated state. The user of a Jammer can declare a BS Attack using his WIP Attribute against a target within his ZoC. However, this weapon does not require LoF to the target. A successful Roll forces the target to make a BTS Roll versus Damage 13. Failing the BTS Roll causes the target to enter the Isolated state, signified by an Isolated Marker in base to base contact. Critical hits with a Jammer put the target directly into the Isolated state, bypassing the usual BTS roll. The user of a Jammer can declare an Intuitive Attack to target a Camouflage or TO Marker within his ZoC. REMEMBER The target of a Comms Attack can declare Reset to avoid the Attack. So not only do you have to be close enough to the Ghazi to trigger other ZoC reactions, (in the case of a Jammer), you have to fail 2 rolls before anything negatively impacts your unit. BTS save says otherwise, though it may not be the smart save. So how much should they cost with the Jammer? ADHLs can put any unit into IMM-2 and can be in a fireteam. Gonna need that engineer anyways. AHDs can put down your toughest units. Looks like you'll still need an answer. Characters are now Veterans, so it looks like someone is ahead of you here. Who can't do this? Jammers were only on one AVA 4 unit before they were shared with other factions. One single unit that doesn't contribute regular orders. Solid plan. Seems like this one game I heard of ...
