Unfortunately, what people here seem to be looking for is a silver bullet. One unit that can declare a BS Attack directly against a fully linked Kamau sniper, and expect it to win. That unit doesn't exist in USARF, so you're going to have to get creative, and USARF has enough bodies and orders to do that with. I've happily spent most of an order pool to move a Foxtrot into position to drop a mine to help clear a Kamau. I've already explained what's worked for me to kill Kamau, and similar units: Spec Fire down their link support. Drop mines in front of them before shooting. Coordinated orders (multiple snipers, missiles, etc.)
Not to mention that you dont even -have- to Spec Fire the Sniper in order to fix the problem. Clip off one or two of the other link members and you're in a much better position to fight it with a standard linked HMG/Sniper.
While I agree with the other options, are you seriously telling me that you are taking your foxtrot and spending however many orders on an 8 stat spec fire vs a fusiliers 10 stat dodge? Like, the other options (flamer grunts, van zant, mines in their face, coordinated sniper grunts, whatevers) I get, and think they all work, but people keep saying this like its a great idea and I just don't get it. I mean, its still better than "throw all your attack pieces one by one against this meatchopper of an ARO piece and pray one of them wins this incredibly disadvantageous face to face", but that 1 swc for a bs11 lgl hurts so much.
You have roughly an 18% chance per shot to spec fire out a single Fusilier from within 16". If you're able to tag 2 Fusiliers with the odds go up to just over 33%, which is pretty respectable for an attack which has no repercussions. I actually started to use the Hunzakut LGL very often in my Dahshat and Druze, which has led me to take them in USARF, the 1 SWC doesn't mean anything in an army with so many 0.5 SWC options, and now 0 SWC haris. Like any tool, use the right one for the job, if you have a more order efficient way that may lose a piece in the process (like mines), and that is the better choice in the situation, then use that.
You are correct. Totally forgot the DA. Not saying it is a good situation, but it is an option that doesn't cost a CT
this all ties into a lot of why I think ASA is the stronger PanO sectorial and the far more dangerous one, while it lacks the MSV sniper the Bagh is almost as good, and hte Baghs weaknesses are covered by the access to massed mines. additionally ASA is tougher on the whole in terms of its individual units than VIRD Yes, yes I am saying that if i needed too id use an entire order pool spec firing that link to death. I dont think it would take that entire pool however, nor do i think fighting the Kamau is often required. And additionally as an aside, if a player is of the opinion that the Kamau MSR must be fought and places as high a priority on dealing with it as claimed in this thread. Then they too should be happy with a no risk method of eliminating it even if it is costing most or all of their order pool. Especially in a faction that typically runs 15-20 orders
Varuna very much has my attention, but like with any potentially overpowered unit (Mutts, Mates, Noc's,) I want to abuse the hell out of it and confirm it is overpowered by winning lots more then normal. I intend to play Snake Eaters soon, if for nothing else just to make sure my group gets practice in vs that sniper.... Sadly I am backlogged trying to test if OSSSS is OP first.
StarCo. and Ikari can only have the Brawlers in a haris, so they don't get all the shiny extras like +3 BS and SSL2.
False, Ikari can have a Brawler in the Tanko + keisotsu + Brawler special core. Often with a Tanko ML
This post is wonderful, because it's a rhetorical question but it looks like the answer is actually 'oh, wait. Most of them.'
My bad, I just checked the Brawler entry in army and said haris and special haris. Didn't check the Keisotsu.
To be fair I usually just jam my Brawler LT on that link and run the Brawler MSV with a pair of Tanko bodyguards in the Haris.
I mean I've definitely won ITS tourneys so I don't know what exactly's going on about that conversation thread.
I have a sneaking suspicion that people on opposite sides of this argument will only comprehend that when the other side is doing it.
I wouldn't call it an appeal to authority, as that kind of argument doesn't care about the quality of the argument as much as about its source. To me, winning an ITS tournament as a threshold for defining that quality, as in the end, it's the best empirical evidence we have. If anything ever skewed the meta, it's the ALEPH. In our playgroup, we practice pitching any list ideas against a theoretical top of the line ALEPH list to determine tournament viability, or we just ask our best player (@Weran, placed #24 at IP VI 'Kraken Masters') to try to crack it. If experience of the best players on our planet is not enough for someone to prove a point about power level of something in this game, then I don't know what is.
We do something similar locally, but what it's good to 'pitch' against is in a constant state of flux. Over time it's been: TAK, OSS, vanilla aleph, phalanx, varuna, briefly ikari, dashat, HB, vanilla haqq, vanill YJ, ISS, briefly starco, caledonians, vanilla ariadna, tohaa, tunguska, vanilla nomads, and bakunin. We, uh, we have a pretty diverse meta locally. It's a good practice, though. Keeps things rotating, and avoids people getting stuck in a mindset that they shouldn't have to change how they play as the game evolves. I don't think I've ever heard any of our local guys put forward an argument that something they can't beat with the last army they played is evidence of a balance problem rather than a driver for them to change what they're doing. (Edit: which is nice.)
I think part of the problem with this kind of conversation is that it feels a lot more rewarding to just try and mike drop on whoever disagrees with us than materially engage with their point. I know reading through I've been pretty tempted to do that a few times already. That's fun but really all that would do is make people who already disagree with me think I'm more of an asshole than they already do. I think the truth is that there's a significant things to learn from both sides of the argument. Generally I've agreed with the point of view that the Kamau sniper deforms the meta because it's something you more or less have to specifically react to in list building (the OP point), and there’s not much else on that level in the game IMHO. I've kinda made my peace with it though. The difference between 'deforms', 'changes', and maybe 'evolves' is really a subjective one depending on how much you like it. I still feel like the Kamau is a little much maybe, but shrug I guess. Things change. One thing that helps me be more OK with it is a little game theory. Basically, although the Kamau Sniper is quite strong, and changes some fundamentals of the way the whole game is played, because it has to be countered, and can be countered, it will be countered. Which means a Varuna player playing the Kamau Sniper in the most straightforward way in isolation will reliably have to deal with it being countered effectively. And that's not a projected win for them. So while VIRD has this incredibly strong piece (in combination with some of their other pieces) all things considered they probably don't come out on top in the meta game in an all comers competitive environment. If everyone knows you have a really good rock, they're gonna start bringing paper. For this reason right now I think the more correct response to a Kamau Sniper deployed for maximum effective board control isn't really to creep around it, (though that might work or be the best situational solution) because that allows the VIRD player to retain much of its utility. I think the best thing is generally to bullet hose it on better odds, like BS16 B5 and effective 2w with a doctor standing by. It's not always the kind of odds you'd typically want to ensure a winning engagement, but it uses the swingy-ness of such a roll against the Kamau, which crumples when it takes a hit and takes a massive amount of board control with it. This forces the Kamau player to consider a likely projected loss, putting the onus to deal with that problem back on them. Spec fire and stuff like that can sure work too, depending on the situation. I've tried that too (with mixed success), but overall I think I'd rather have the issue decided more directly, all things being equal.
