1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hemos actualizado nuestra Política de Privacidad acorde con la nueva RGPD. +Info // We've updated our Privacy Policy to comply with the GDPR. +Info
    Dismiss Notice

What if Jammer's Isolation was persistant only in Jammer's ZoC

Discussion in 'Access Guide to the Human Sphere' started by eciu, Jul 5, 2019.

  1. oldGregg

    oldGregg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2018
    Messages:
    1,104
    Likes Received:
    933
    Well if you aren't crutching on them, then I guess they aren't broken. Debate closed.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  2. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,397
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    Maakrep is one of the worst troops on the Onyx roster and Ko Dali is 40 points for a 1 w trooper. It's not like a MSV2 troop that can be in a fireteam with cheap filler.

    No, you misunderstood what I was saying. Why do people need Jammers to help against Warbands if Onyx can do it without MSV 2 AROs, cheap warbands to defend yourself, or minelayers?
     
  3. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    Well, you are focusing in parts of the whole argument. Doing the same we could say that nomads have no valid MSV2 because intruder (their only one in vanilla or the sectorials) is 1w and cannot be in any fireteam when it can be over the 40 points. But that is a kind of fallacy.

    What I meant is for TJC not having cheap warbands, MSV2 and midfield minelayers. For that sectorial jammer is the only defense against smoke warbands, and only if they don't have stealth. Yes, onyx might have two bad (or not, have not played it) MSV2, but they have the option.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  4. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,397
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    Which undermines your point because your argument is based on these components.

    It also has camo, Multiterrain, and isn't bloated with an automedkit. Regardless, they're rarely left on ARO duty and are primarily used to attack.

    And it's basically not worth it to defend with MSV2 troops against warbands in Onyx. Sure, they can lay smoke down with impunity, but proper deployment and counter-AROs can do the job. So by definition the Jammer isn't the "only defense" against smoke warbands.
     
  5. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    Undermines nothing because you are using a fallacy, you just ignore what is not good for your argument, like you did just now again. Did I say it were the only one? No, I put 3 different examples of tools (whose work for more situations), and none of them is in TJC, the 4th one would be jammers. If there are others, you should point them.

    And if you insist on the positioning argument, we can stop there, because then jammers can be dealt with that too. And not only jammers or cheap smoke warmands but anything in the game.
     
    A Mão Esquerda likes this.
  6. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,397
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    I didn't "[use] a fallacy." I pointed out that your argument ("I need Jammers because I don't have x, y, and z to deal with Warbands") fails because other factions don't have those either, and still do ok against warbands. And VIRD has the best MSV2 ARO in the game, and yet has Jammers as well - it's almost as if the positioning of Jammers in sectorials isn't part of some careful distribution of defensive tech, but is relatively arbitrary, thus making the removal of Jammers from the game relatively painless.

    We're not talking about dealing with Jammers, we're talking about dealing with Warbands.
     
    Mahtamori likes this.
  7. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    Pointing as an example a faction that has at least one of those tools and dismissing it just because you think is not worth and ignoring all the other topic.

    And we are talking about jammers. This thread is about jammers. My point talking about warbands is its relationship with jammers being a tool against them, and mostly the only one in the TJC army, because they lack the other tipical tools against them. Ignoring a part of the argument (and the topic) just because it doesn't work well with yours is what you are doing here
     
  8. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,397
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    @Armihaul You know what, you're clearly advocating from the "Tunguska has Jammers and I play Tunguska therefore I must defend Jammers" point of view. Jammers are *not* a tool to defend against warbands, because what do you do against a Daturazi?
     
  9. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    What do I do? Suffer them. If they go mision on smoke, I can do nothing (because my only tool there is jammer, and they are inmune, unless they send dr. worm), 0 options. If they rush to my zone to hunt, maybe a lucky shot from a surprise spectr could do something if I have the luck to aro in the second half, but usually won't work thanks to smoke. Even krakots are a problem, they are more common and doesn't need smoke, they just hunt down the hecklers. I have to do mision before, without jammers better. Other problems are people with stealth (or martial arts) and so. Some people appointed those problems before

    So yes. Against those, there are a lot of extra problems.

    I wouldn't mind not having to play jammers, really, but TJC would be too much limited, and that was my original point: if they took out jammers or overnerf them, they should bring something to compensate if not, the ones in bad position will get ina worse one.

    Actually I've decided to stop playing tunguska (I've played it since it appeared until last week) just to keep trying other things. But after this time, jammers seem no more as powerful as seemed to be. Is not the same in a spamable 5point dude than in a 20point one in an expensive sectorial. Is a huntable took, and east to deal with if you have the meanings. One of my best record with jammers was spending 1 turn and getting achiles isolated. Then he spent achiles irregular order to kill the heckler, and 2 orders in the yudbot to get it normal again. What a great deal, right?
     
    Modock and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  10. Tourniquet

    Tourniquet TJC Tech Support

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    332
    Jammers in TJC are more for herding larger units into other model's kill zones, they wont work against warbands due to almost all of them having stealth thanks to martial arts. When it comes to warding off warbands MSV2 isn't doing anything unlinked as your opponent will just bring up a HMG and just burst it off the table. In general (especially TJC) You are better off contesting it conventionally with flash pulses and standard linked weapons and creative placement of perimeter weapons like crazy koalas, mines, and relying on close range point defence.

    On jammers in general it is strong but broken on a platform like the Zulu Cobra and Heckler, but obnoxious verging on broken when you can take 4 on a superior platform and have points left over for the same cost as either the Heckler or ZC.
     
    Berjiz, chaos11 and Hecaton like this.
  11. CabalTrainee

    CabalTrainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    565
    How about fixing cheap warbands and jammers for N4? So we don't need the crutch to defend against the other crutch!
     
    SpectralOwl, Berjiz, Section9 and 4 others like this.
  12. Hecaton

    Hecaton EI Anger Translator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    4,397
    Likes Received:
    4,277
    But then how would I smoke + warband + chain rifle to have a unit trade for something that costs 6 times its value? I might have to actually worry about enemy AROs and winning FtF rolls!
     
    Berjiz and CabalTrainee like this.
  13. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    I think that maybe what are neede are some extra options against them instead of nerfing. Little by little there have appeared more veteran lvl1 troops, every vainilla have at least one (krakot), and most of sectorials will have them. There are also other options like speculative fire to hunt them, superjump and climbing plus that can move away from those jammers and shot them down from outside zoc, and so
     
  14. Mahtamori

    Mahtamori Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    5,847
    Likes Received:
    7,272
    Allow me to go add another one to the pile: I'm not sure the state of melee is entirely healthy when it needs numerous sources of auto-hitting template attacks to balance and deter melee-specialised units (this is what I think IJW wrote on the subject way way back regarding why TAGs so often have heavy flamethrowers).

    Why am I saying this? Name one Warband that is problematic that doesn't have DTW or Jammer, but which works only with BS weapons that respect the LOF and FTF mechanics. I don't personally consider the tie-in between Warbands and smoke nor the function of smoke to be as much of a problem (and no, I don't generally put MSV2 units to ARO against smoke, that's a very good way to have an expensive and vital model get killed by a HMG, unless it's very late game and I've managed to take care of nearly all high-burst threats and somehow managed to keep my MSV2 alive, but that's a big if).
    DTWs currently have an inverse relationship with unit cost. On really cheap units they're a bit of a problem, so maybe cheap Warbands should stop having auto-hitting weapons and maybe cheap warbands should instead be routinely equipped with cheap regular BS weapons like SMGs, Assault Pistols and Light Shotguns.
     
    SpectralOwl, Berjiz, Hecaton and 2 others like this.
  15. CabalTrainee

    CabalTrainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    565
    @Armihaul Isn't that what people argue for in this thread? Like making them targetable by certain hacking programs.

    I personally am for nerfing the isolated state overall. Or splitting it in two like immobilized.
     
  16. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    yes and not. Some people just want nerfs because seems to me they don't know how to deal with them. I just tryed to expose why jammer is not so powerful, and that maybe, it is even needed to be a strong tool because some factions lack a lot in other tactics/tools/options.

    about isolation, I don't see it as powerful, but I wouldn't mind the use of 2 different levels (one that could be taken out with a reset, and the actual one, but reset needs a revision for that, is too powerful at this moment, don't make it more useful please). It is just a nuisance because the miniature is still there, and is reminding that is there in that state. The trooper can still deffend himself, go suppression fire, camo, or even do mission if its near enough. But in reality, is not as problematic as beign dead (which can be done with weapons as expensive, but with better burst, range or DTW). Is just that for some big guys is a big problem, but usually, those big guys are hard to dealt with, using the tipical tools (and that is why I think some other people want to nerf this kind of tools).

    To finish it up, at the moment, some factions have good access to ap or exp, others to glue, and others to isolation, and isolation might be more frustrating than killing because the miniature will remain there (its a perception thing, you get reminded over and over again), but is better to kill and do the mission without oppostion, than isolate, and have still there oposition
     
    #256 Armihaul, Aug 12, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2019
    Papa Bey, Modock and A Mão Esquerda like this.
  17. CabalTrainee

    CabalTrainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    385
    Likes Received:
    565
    I can't speak for tunguska because i don't play them and no one in my play group plays them (i don't consider the sectorial overall to be good but that's a whole other topic) But my most played armies are Vanilla Haqq and Varuna. And i can say that pretty much none of the "nerfs" proposed in this thread would make me reconsider how many jammers i would include in my army.

    I would still bring 4 ghazis every game and 2 ZC with jammers. And i doubt my list capabilities would drop much. If tunguska needs them that much i think it should get some general improvements anyway.
     
  18. Armihaul

    Armihaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2017
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    329
    Tunguska is in the medium table overall (not a bad sectorial, but also not a good one. Just has a few good options but too much limited), and one of the worst designed of the new ones. Is not that they need them so much but more in the way that they don't have much other options, and nerfing one of the few they have would sink them.
     
    Modock likes this.
  19. Modock

    Modock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    894
    Tunguska has too many weaknesses at the moment. No cheap warband, no MVS2, no strong aros, no cheap infiltrators or infiltrators + minelayer, no cheap infiltrators specialits. No chain of command, no lieutenant camo, no wildcards. The links aren't that flexible.
    The list is just too long, that's why the jammers are so important to TJC.
     
  20. Modock

    Modock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    894
    IMO Tunguska is the weakest sectorial of the new ones.
     
    CabalTrainee likes this.