Ghazi are great. Agree there, and I've said it before. They are far from game breaking. Everything they do can be countered in one way, shape, or form. They greatest thing about infinity (IMO) is the list building aspect. If you were really worried about ghazi, just take something in your list to deal with them. Mines, spec fire, anything with decent bts, the list goes on. You think that Ghazi are game breaking, but the problem is solved with .5 swc? Laughable. Build better lists. Make better choices. Problem solved.
I can't tell if you're considering that expensive or cheap. You are being absolutely toxic, however, is your tactic to get @Koni to censure all debate instead of discussing stuff you don't agree with politely?
I understand where you are coming from, but I do not think 0.5 swc is deterrence in a army that does not have problems with swc like Haqq. Also, the boarding shotgun option might not even exist on Ghazi. The swc cost would however be a limitation on both Nomad and PanO.
If you think disagreement is toxic, I'll just end my part in the discussion now. Sorry you were offended. ^This is what I was getting at.
No, Gregg, it's your "Git Gud" attitude that's toxic. That's a very good point of discussion. I'd still be very interested to see where this leads in practice, however, as it would seriously impact your use of other fillers like the excellent throw-aways that are Daylami Pzf and it would be difficult to max Muttas and bring both Al Fasid and Tarik, not to mention that it'd put a dent in the number of hacking devices of non-KHD flavour that would be able to come along.
Al Fasid isn't a top tier choice in Vanilla, and isn't available in Hassassins. So no, it doesn't have much of an impact. The fact you suggest such a minor change leads me to believe you're just arguing for the sake of it, or pick sub-optimal units to go into your list. (I think fasids are great fun, just not one of the better choices). I'm sorry you feel that way. Debating the strength of a unit is pretty meaningless unless you're talking about optimal comparisons. If I were to run a swiss guard against a weak player, they would probably call that broken too.
And likewise, if you are not sufficiently good at using Muttas, you may think they are not as good as they actually are. I have faced Muttas by an excellent player, and while he shares your general opinion that the faction itself is in a good place, he's also telling me that nerfing Muttas is nerfing the entire faction. That strikes me as very, very, wrong, and needs serious consideration by CB. The fact that I'm suggesting a minor change is that I know what lists he's building and that it'd mess with them, take them down a notch, but not destroy them. This still means CB probably needs to make a pass on faction balance here.
Nah, wrong again. I run mutts in a lot of lists and they perform excellently. I’ve never thought they were weak, and when I first started playing infinity, I too thought they were too good. After playing the game for quite a while, learning a lot of the various tricks and tactics and facing mutts in the hands of good players, I changed my mind. Mutts are a great little unit, but they aren’t too good. Why? They fit in very nicely to vanilla and HB, providing a nice little bit of cohesion, but they don’t actually complete a lot of objectives. They are limited in range, and they do not contribute orders to your order pool. When it comes down to it, mutts are a control piece that are balanced by limited range, ext impetus, and a lack of powerhouse units that capitalize on what they bring to the table. Haqq has one MSV2 2 unit, and nothing like Joan. Haqq isn’t top tier, but can compete. I think it’s about as interesting and as balanced a faction can get in infinity, or any other war game. It’s why I’ve continued to play them all this time.
This isnt a good argument though, the faction is balanced around itself and its inhabitants. Of course a nerf to one gear or belt will damage the machine overall. Nerfing any particular unit of a faction will likely hurt it's balance overall.
Hey, no; come on. I've watched this exchange run for a couple of days, read all the posts with interest, and (aside from popcorn-throwing from the cheap seats) see nothing particularly 'toxic' by the main protagonists here. I'm aware that its popular these days to think that everyone should agree about everything, but the opinion of someone a lot smarter with experience of much more serious conflict said a thing to say about the value of honest disagreement (look it up ). There are several guys arguing here that I'd gladly travel to roll some dice with, and whose opinions on points cost in the faction I’d be delighted to hear first-hand over a beer or two. So accusations of toxicity dont work for me at all; toxic to what? On the other hand... this is so far off-topic that even I - living in a home with floor-to-ceiling glazing as I do and suitably fearful of throwing stones as I am, have to put a hand up and say surely this would all be better read in the Haqq' forum?
The faction is balanced around itself, but due to how CB has structured their point system you will have cross-faction imbalances bleeding over to other factions as soon as a piece of equipment is shared. Additionally, due to how we build lists in infinity, if you were to nerf the ever living hell out of a particular unit, let's pick Bao troop entirely on random (which is the thread's biggest lie), then the faction imbalance wouldn't be affected at all because no or few decent lists ever uses the unit anyway. In the perfect faction, nerfing any unit would decrease the facrion's viability as a whole, as you note. But the sum total of the arguments so far seem to indicate very strongly that Muttas are a critical/pivotal unit for Haqq and HB. Which isn't a problem as far as external balanceis concerned if ever single list is meant to have 4 of them, but that sounds so... wrong... for what Infinity is. That's such a GW way of balancing tthings to make a unit so good that they become mandatory and the curveball is to not field the unit.
Comms Equipment doesn't do much. Makes them vulnerable to Hacking Device and Assault Hacking Device as well as other Jammers and E/M. It's better, but doesn't solve the big issues with how a Jammer operates compared to every other weapon and interaction in game. This in a game where some metas have allegedly simply stopped playing HI because of Blackout, Jammers are Blackout that works on (nearly) everything. Indiscriminate DTW is my current pet solution simply because it forces the Jammer models to be much more aggressive, and rewards them for it. Can't have them stick around (too) close to Joan or Saladin to guard them, or you risk Isolating them, too.
It’s official folks. He found an answer. You can also use mines, grenades, and AROs. Bonus points for msv2 AROs. You can also clip them with templates aimed at other units! Did you know? Mutts can’t ever gain cover, either! It looks like a whole game of possibilities is opening up to you.
"Quick! Let me be obtuse in the hopes that the br0ken unit I crutch on doesn't get the nerf bat! Deploy the chaff! Deploy the irrelevant cross faction comparisons to other units that cost 5-6 times as much. Deploy the Sarcasm and cynicism! THROW EVERYTHING AT IT OH GOD" And I say this as someone who also plays HB.
I've always thought that the calls for Jammers to be Comms Equipment are more that the fluff for the tool doesn't align well with it's table top rules. You can have problems like that, and not necessarily have it be critically broken. Like having your Good Guy Haqq dudes cower behind a HVT to keep from getting shot.
And I’m the one who’s toxic? I suggested several other solutions while you threw shade. I play several factions, and have never had an issue playing against ghazi. The only people I’ve ever met irl that have issue are terrible at the game. Obviously you’re reaction means you’ll only continue to act like a child, so I’ll leave this thread. It’s completely devolved. @RogueJello Jammers irl are usually just a box that litterally floods wavelengths/bandwidth/etc. they just get turned on and can’t usually be hacked at all. From a fluff perspective, I’d say make jammers an indiscriminate bubble at most.
...yes. Yes you are. How does this not make it clearly to you? Then again, you could just try and call everyone who disagrees with you bad at the game as you have been, and now declare you're plugging your ears... You do you, dude!
