At the last event I went to, in two of the five rounds I faced an opponent whose defensive mix included heavy reliance on hackers with -3 or -6 tinbots and behind projected repeater networks. In those two games, I killed a total of six enemy hackers on the first turn, through their firewalls (edit: in four out of six cases, to be fair; two I caught exposed with my own pitchers), with trinity. Reliance on forward-deployed networks and hacking dominance for is not risk free. Dealing with enemy hackers proactively is both extremely possible and a very effective tactic. You just can't do it by walking a WIP13 BTS0 KHD into enemy repeater range any more.
Using which hacker? Unless you've got one of the upgraded Trinity programs, that sounds specious or lucky. Cool, then distribute profiles like Jazz, Interventors, or Barids to other factions. And delete all the WIP 13 BTS 0 KHDs because they're apparently useless.
Oh I was 100% using an Anathematic, because the event telegraphed a fairly heavy hacking metagame and I intended to capitalise on that. I'd have been equally comfortable making the same attacks using OSS or Haqqislam where - yep, there's good networks and upgraded offensive programs (although no damage bonus in haqqislam but honestly Trinity -3 is probably my favourite for anything south of a Fairy Dusted Asura. Locally we also have people using Interventor KHDs to similar good effect. Anecdotally I've also had vanilla Aleph counter-hacking work effectively against me literally by using spotlight as an anti-hacker tool, which was fairly cute. What we don't have is people trying to win a hacking war using Yu Jing, Tohaa, or Ariadna. They're just not hacking factions, although Yu Jing in particular for some reason has a whole bunch of trap options to try to convince people otherwise and presumably distract them from the actually good stuff in faction.
totally see your point there, but you dont play that on its own, so u need at least one hacker, and to accomplish the plan properly a couple more (lets say, 17 0,5 each). Yes, Some factions bring a Hacker or three no matter the set up, but still, its points to spend. and especially with investing 2,5 or more SWC, some factions lack options for additional options for proper Heavy hitters with long range or ARO tools. Not Nomads, of course, cause we are superiour. I am playing hacking since i start rolling D20 with N2. I think i know a thing or two about hacking. And belive me: Its way more easy now. Modificators on existing programs is one thing, having 28 different programms, seperated into 12 sub-Programms (CLAW, SWORD,....) and wildly scattered onto 5 different Hacking devices.....? Hell, no. With 2 different Programms to Possess a TAG and 1 to get rid of it 3 Options how to counter or deflect an Hacking attack. One Programm to unlock doors and one to cupe de grace unconciouse REM´s Giving trinity a -3 MOD for enemys or +2 dmg seems way more understandeble than 4 different programms cause wounds on ONE hacking device, but one deals DA, one is high dmg AP, the next one is basicly Monofilament and the last forces your opponent to dance zumba around the table. not to mention the "special skills" of hacking devices, like giving SS or an automatic Controlled jump. with slightly modifying existing programms CB is reducing the list of random BS. There are 12 different Programms, everything has its use. CB continouse how they changed rules in N4: BS (+1DMG), Dodge (PH=11), Pistol (+1B),..... If someone is overwhelmed by traits like "Hacking +1dmg" or "Trinity (-3)"......well... i hope this one will never open the unit profile of an CC-expert. His mind will melt like a Aristeia!-Mini in the australian summer. Totally not seeing that. I use Carbonite extremly often. An isolated ARO-piece still shoots, an An immobilized one does not and therefor can be killed without it shooting back. If its a TAG i Total Control him. If it is not hackable, i spotlight it. If i face a hacker, i Trinity in active and Oblivion in ARO. Thats every programm of the basic Hacking Device used. In an hacker fight its will mostly be Trinity vs. Oblivion ARO, but you can use carbonite aswell, cause DA works quite good against low BTW units and sometimes a immobilized Target is better than a Isolated one. An immobilized unit cannot ARO with shoot and is therefore more easy to kill. First: my condolences to everyone playing Ariadna. Second: CAMO hard-counters Hacker. So what? There are couple of hard counters out there, and Ariadna CAMO-spam is not an N4 anti-hacking invention. Nomad also can CAMO-spam. AND they can hack. How do you want to explain you can hack a painted peasant in a manhole covert with dirt and leaves, with a system developted by a community where each and everyone has a w-lan device built in its head and bodyparts and armor connected to this network? Ariadna does not want to be part of the hacking game? Fine. The moment you stick your nose out of the pile of sh* u call "cover" i target you and send a missle to the face. How do you want to counter that with all your non-hacking. This game contains a lot of so-called hard-counters: -Smoke to hard-counter everything without MSV -Albedo/White noice to hard-counter everything with MSV -Eclipse to counter everything, except units who "feel" you. -doctors to counter PanO I played a lot against CAMO-Spam and learned the value of Sensor and MSV. At the end of the day, a dirty peasant with BS 11 and CAMO and Mimetism is just a bad shooting peasent if u strip him of his camo. Ariadna can hard counter a part of your army, so take a different part of your kit and counter Ariadna. If you solely depend on hacking then maybe you deserve to get yourself beaten to death by ariadnan sticks and stones. Totally with you. Some armys depend one 1 or 2 so called "heavy lifters". If you arent able to play the game with this units down you have to protect them as good as possible.On the other hand should there be enough other units in a list to be able to execute a Plan B in case things go south for the Alpha-Units. Also there are lists built out of avarage units so the loss of single units doesnt break the whole mission plan. i Imagine how that works: A Unit with a pitcher standing in the deployment zone shoots at -3 on 24``, i hack the unprotected enemy centerpiece through this place repeater and shoot it with missles. 3 Orders to eliminate a Jotum, and everything weaker. Thats imho a best-case scenario, depending on: -I win deployment and go first turn -I deploy 3 units (pitcher, hacker, guided ML Drone) and my opponent does ignore all of that, so he deploys his centerpiece without a hacker to protect right vis-a-vis the pitcher, and with no ARO piece watching this straight line down to the enemy DZ or some ominouse markers in close proximity -The enemy has an obvious Heavy lifter (or ltn, maybe) -The enemy heavy lifter is not a Marker (cause we learned: CAMO hardcounters hacking, so.... damn you, Hac Tao, Anathematic, Sphinx, Swiss guard, intruder, Cutter, Clausewitz, Ariadna,...) -First order: I shoot the pitcher (thats mostly BS12 on -3 cause range. Some could argue to shoot with a linked tsyklon sputnik twice, so B2 BS13. Best case scenario here) -The pitcher miraciously lands -There is no enemy hacker in the Hacking area -Second Order: I activate the Hacker no one sees (that should be easy) and hack vs. the enemy Centerpiece. Thats B1 WIP against B1 WIP. Best case WIP 17 (anathematic) vs. WIP 12 (PanO) without any ECM. Normaly the odds arent that amazing, so mostly Wip 14 vs. Wip 13. Less than 50% chance. -Again, failure isnt in my vocabular, i spotlight on first try. -Third Order: I missle launcher the enemy centerpiece. B1 BS 18 against PH-3 -I hit and my enemy cannot do saves. this scenario is hilariousely optimistic and depends on the enemy working with you. I dont realy see that coming like that, especially with all the single rolls on bad chances. Pitchers on max range tend to just disappear. Twice. If you see this little trick built up, how about not placing the Heavy lifter were a dep.repeater can easily reach him without the shooter investing a lot. Or to protect him with an hacker on your own? Single rolls, even on high numbers, are unlikly to win F2F on a regular base. Spotlight is such a roll. WIP is mostly quite similar. You can achive the target state in 1 order. Or u waste 4 orders trying. Same goes for the Missle. Yes, its very high numbers against avarage at best, but still. All this can also be achived by some kind of Impersinator (Speculo, this tooha dude,....) or, if you fancy the "luck is my way to go"-option, Grenade launchers. Imho: if the tactic is so simple and effizient, why does anyone still play smth else? But isn´t that exactly what you just described? The effort of 3 different units to precision strike one single unit. Now its Carpet bombing. Is it maybe both and everything in this specific case depends on the Missle launcher drone? I think i needed 2 seconds to find a solution for this problem: Kill the damn drone. Maybe if i shoot a pitcher in my first turn into close range, out of my DZ...... Sorry for the wall of text. tl;dr: Nomads OP
@anubis typically you just kill their lt top of 1. Use a heckler with a fastpanda and there isn't really a good counter. Also when you're dealing with units like Interventors Carbonite and Trinity don't really work, so you have to use Oblivion. Oblivion is the new Redrum, basically.
I have to say I agree with most of what @anubis is writing here. Regarding the hacking programs, I'd rather have "UPGRADE: Trinity(AP)" or similar written in the specific profiles, as this is consistent with the rest of N4. I for one do not believe that if it were a different program instead, I would not have to look it up to see what it does again. I would not want Sheeskiin to have a unique weapon that my opponents have to ask the stats of everytime, since no one else uses it, but can rather say "it's a +2 Damage Red Fury". With the GML strategy, I posted a thread analyzing the numbers some time ago in the "Rules suggestions" subforum, and it bears out that is usually a commitment of 5-6 orders to kill a unit that way. And if it is the Lt, as @Hecaton describes, maybe it should not be so obvious? If it is the 1 or 2 centerpiece units, as @Triumph says, maybe factor this in in listbuilding and add some redundancy? Furthermore, I would assume that for a list that so highly depends on a single unit, this unit is generally something like a TAG or a bulky HI or character, and the efficiency of the GML strategy goes down drastically against such targets.
Sorry, but hacking Jazz in a tinbot -6 link with a Ninja.... On one side there is a girl unable to do anything but online games from behind the best firewall there is, with the aiming of a catapult and the fitness of a sloth, and on the other hand u have a sporty killing mashine, able to slice a pretty pattern into the wings of a bee while flying, who happens to have found an old 8k modem on a fleamarket. And you try to hack her. I don´t want to ask how u tend to break in brickwalls. I guess "eggs" is your answer. Thats what courtesy lists are for, and it is also a point of "i know my army, and that gives me an advantage". How often do you double check if a unit has BS +1DMG? Or which weapon it has beside its main weapon. Or what special skill a unit has exactly. Can u tell me, out of your mind, every special skill of... dunno. Lupe balboa? Damn, i play this girl and dont have everything in mind. So i double check. That´s one short look. Well, that are very mature arguments to keep the discussion valuable. just kinda right. Black out was a hacking Programm with single target. Nullifiers were the "Anti-repeaters" in ZoC Inside the Area of Effect of a Nullifier troopers cannot declare the use of Hacking Programs, Technical Weapons, Comms Attacks, or Sepsitor, applying the effect of an Idle in such situation.
As a Tohaa player, in N3 I could ignore hacking mostof the time. Now not only I cannot ignore it any longer, I have also lost access to the Nullifiers.
@Th1nG some factions are locked into obvious lts. The GML situation is still too efficient for a no-LOS kill, potentially of multiple models. Your complaint about a khd ninja being able to kill Jazz kinda fails when you look at their points cost. Jazz isn't costed like a hacking heavy hitter, she's dirt cheap. A ninja is a more elite unit that supposedly is the predator for her mind of profile, she should have trouble with a ninja khd.
Jazz beeing quite cheap, i´ve never spoken against that. BUT: You are aware, that the point cost of the Ninja killer hacker doesnt come from his ability to hack? MAYBE (and this maybe is in Capslock for a reason) the higher point cost comes from this nearly obsolet skills like.... Mimetism -6, Hidden deployment, infiltrating, Martial Arts, CC 23,.... This argument of yours is so invalid i think u make fun of it on purpose. With the same point you could argue "Well, Aquila is way overpriced if u compare it to a Black Friar with Albedo. I cannot do anything against it, AND he has a weapon totally counters my HMG range with ammo to counter my ARM." Jazz has one job and one alone: hacking. and like everyone else with one single purpose she is cooked down in point costs to exactly that. Why dont everyone cry about Shaolins? 6 Points for a unit with smoke AND beeing able to 1on1 my swiss guard in close combat. Totally unbalanced crap. U know what u do? Don´t go into melee with shaolin if u are a Swiss Guard! Shoot the damn Monk! Dont hack jazz with a damn Ninja. Melee her! Shoot her! She sucks at both!
So basically, you're agreeing with the complaint that was being made. Factions, such as Yu Jing, who used to compete in the active hacking space and utilise active hacking defenses are no longer able to do so, and are naturally pushed towards passive defenses instead in N4 because.... *checks notes* the gap between hacking strength of factions has widened in N4. You are ignoring the context of that discussion. Said unit used to be a viable active hacking defense, it isn't anymore. Because it and units like it aren't viable anymore said factions don't attempt to actively defend themselves from hacking they pick passive defenses more often than not. This reduces the hacking aspect of N4 because there is less competition in the hacking space, there is less hacking going on and more opponents who reach for a camouflage marker and say "guess what, nobody's hacking now." Pitchers benefit from link bonuses (they really shouldn't, they should be a technical weapon), and they often only need to fire up to 24" not max range. There are also some X-Visor link team pitchers in the game too. I don't get what your point here is? This is part of the reason those units are so popular, they have an inbuilt passive hacking defense in the form of camo. This is exactly what we were complaining about, people are pushed towards picking attack units with passive defenses like these instead of being able to take active defenses and actually interacting with the hacking game. If there's a hacker in the area, they're just going to be the first casualty most likely as we're talking about a faction that can't hack well trying to defend itself against a faction that can. You are completely missing the point. The point was when we went to the N4 system CB were trying to make hacking actually relevant against Ariadna, instead all they did was create a system where Ariadna was encouraged to camo spam even harder than they already were as a hard counter against hacking. So the end result was hacking is still hopeless against Ariadna. CB had a goal and they failed to make it work as they wanted which is unfortunate. You are completely overlooking the point that it happens from absolute safety and doesn't over extend any of your units. If I had the option to spend 10 orders on turn 1 to kill an Avatar and do it at no risk I would do it every damn time, shit I would spend 15 orders if I needed to. Taking the teeth out of your opponent's army turn 1 is high value, doing it with 0 casualties and not exposing yourself to retribution is even better. Look I know you're missing part of this because English isn't your first language but again, THAT'S EXACTLY MY POINT. The point was the N4 system didn't simplify shit, we still need to keep checking profiles because there's still a bucket load of functionally unique programs and CB keeps adding more. People who try to argue the N4 system was worth it because it successfully simplified hacking are categorically wrong.
While I do have to admit I'm not as well-versed in this game as most of you, I do not know of any faction that only has obvious lt choices with AVA1. Obviously, bringing a few Securitate in Tunguska just to hide my lt might not be part of my list building plan, but that is a conscious choice. And if I'm only bringing the one guy, I don't see how any of the impersonators, Margot & Duroc or many other units can't kill it just as easily - yes, with more danger to the unit itself, but sometimes even more efficient and allowing to go on with the attack afterwards. Since I didn't play before N4 I won't comment on some of your other points in your post, but I'd like to discuss these two: I do agree that the GML strategy could be more interactive, but it only is so totally if you null-deploy, otherwise you'd have to clear AROs for your Pitcher at least. Nonetheless, as your use of subjunctive in regard to the Avatar shows you know, the strategy does not work against many heavy hitters. Thus I would argue it usually fails to take the teeth of the opponents army, as you propose. Regarding the second point, I would argue that having to look up TRINITY: +1DMG on the list IS simpler than having to first look up which program the unit has, and then what the program does (as memorizing them all would be harder the more there are). So I would argue that it might not be a simplification for you, but not categorically none.
The issue is that you're essentially saying that the only smart Lt choice is one that isn't obvious - so no Nourkias in OCF, etc. Which is not a good thing. I find it much easier to defend against Margot or Duroc than a GML - proper positioning of Unidrons, for example, means that Duroc is just going to walk into some plasma fire if he tries to creep round the back. Interjecting here to say it's not as you say - you can slice the pie to long-bomb pitchers without taking AROs, and there's units like Hecklers with Fastpandas that can make it happen even if you leave out ARO pieces, even to the point of reaching units in the back of the enemy DZ.
Aight, so where's the unit that's enough points of hacker-killing capability to compete with Jazz? It kinda doesn't exist, that's the problem. The difference is, KHDs should punch above their weight against enemy hackers. They currently don't. Except you can't melee her or shoot her if she's tucked back in the enemy DZ, protected by multiple other models and a repeater network to ensure she gets her business done with no chance of retaliation or interaction. Moreover, where's the unit that beats her in hacking? KHDs are supposed to be anti-hacker hackers, but instead we've got a situation where hacking devices (and in some cases HD+) are the most reliable tool for anti-hacker hacking, and KHDs are just prey.
But the people who wanted to be able to null deploy with a repeater network and gain significant benefit with no risk are *very* happy with the current situation, and got exactly what they wanted. Hacking Devices should be scared of KHDs. They're currently not. This is a problem. Even @RobertShepherd touts his upgraded Trinity but it's on a regular hacking device for the utility.
It is rare that an active ARO defense actually does this because of slicing the pie and dropping the pitchers without revealing to the ARO piece.. It's only really a thing if you're someone who doesn't play by intent. This sets a new record for god awful attempt at a nitpick. I said "if" because I play Yu Jing. Throwing a Pitcher across the table isn't available to that faction. IF I had the option to do that and spend my entire first turn deleting an Avatar, I would, because it would utterly fuck my opponent over. The point being the order expenditure would be worth it despite being extremely high and these attempts at arguing that engaging in long distance hacking domination on the first turn not being worth it are false.
Thank you for reiterating what you meant, I do agree that this might limit obvious lts more than other strategies and that this is unfortunate. I think we agree that some counterplay to GML should exist and it should be more interactive, but might differ in what (and how strong) that should be. Regarding the second point, I would argue that such perfect terrain setup might be encountered less often than one thinks, but I already learned that table setup is highly different and diverse around the world and even within metas. And yes, the Heckler can do it, but that increases the cost, as that usually means the Heckler dies in the process.
I do not appreciate your tone, I am sorry that I do not know which faction you are playing. It does not change the fact, however, that the GML strategy fails to successfully kill many of the heavy hitters as efficiently as you propose here.
