|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jul 31, 2017 0:21:52 GMT
I'm kinda bothered by this. Nobody even asks what caster of stuff the player even has when giving suggestions for play into X. They just jump directly to counters you could use against X.
I get that a player that has nothing but anti-infantry combat solos might be told to maybe spice it up with some armor crackers, but thats not what happens.
Is anybody else bothered by this? No play tips just pure tech teching?
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Jul 31, 2017 0:27:12 GMT
Are we talking about gear check lists or not? Does this even come up regarding lists that are not gear checks? How often are lists played that are not somehow gear checks?
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jul 31, 2017 0:30:59 GMT
Are we talking about gear check lists or not? Does this even come up regarding lists that are not gear checks? How often are lists played that are not somehow gear checks? I mean period. I think I see like 1 idea how to take on any kind of list with whatever for every 5 I see about how you should take on X to take on Vyros or something.
|
|
|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jul 31, 2017 0:35:03 GMT
I think it's clearly easier to offer list counters to common problem casters than to run through a list of every possible caster and their particular strategies.
I get what you mean, though. I guess the problem is that the question isn't usually phrased as "I am playing this/these casters, what strategy should I try when going into this other caster?"
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Jul 31, 2017 0:36:27 GMT
I defaniteley see your point. But with lists like Deny 1 ghost fleet and most of Cygnars gunlines or Jack Spam of all flavors, Most of the game is sadly played out just during List construction.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jul 31, 2017 0:47:13 GMT
I defaniteley see your point. But with lists like Deny 1 ghost fleet and most of Cygnars gunlines or Jack Spam of all flavors, Most of the game is sadly played out just during List construction. I can see that to an extent, but in my opinion caster suggestions should be the last suggestions you make (Unless you think that caster is downright awful). You like using an anti infantry caster? Shore up their weaknesses with a Jr. for instance.
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Jul 31, 2017 0:55:36 GMT
I defaniteley see your point. But with lists like Deny 1 ghost fleet and most of Cygnars gunlines or Jack Spam of all flavors, Most of the game is sadly played out just during List construction. I can see that to an extent, but in my opinion caster suggestions should be the last suggestions you make (Unless you think that caster is downright awful). You like using an anti infantry caster? Shore up their weaknesses with a Jr. for instance. I will say, casters typically dictate how a list performs and what its design goal is. For instance, Kaya 2 is a hit and run fighter with an assasination threat. There sadly isn't too much strategy playing her into any gunline that ignores stealth. You just kind of run forward hug terrain and hope for the best. Kromac 2 is the same way, he has absoluteley no real way to play into a gunline effectiveley due to his very nature. A lot of factions Need a dedicated gunline drop just so they don't get pooped on when someone walks up with a bunch of Boosted long range shooting. Part of my issue with warmachine and hordes in general right now is the limitations on pairings I can play to make sure my list is able to handle certain match ups in the meta. But that's honestly the current nature of the game. I would love to be able to play Kromac 2 all the time, but he just naturally falls short in my current meta. No amount of strategy can help that.
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Jul 31, 2017 0:58:28 GMT
Are we talking about gear check lists or not? Does this even come up regarding lists that are not gear checks? How often are lists played that are not somehow gear checks? I mean period. I think I see like 1 idea how to take on any kind of list with whatever for every 5 I see about how you should take on X to take on Vyros or something. Ok, I'll try a reply that isn't a bunch of questions in return. The thing is, this is my experience (from mostly the Ret, Legion and Cryx forums): I see many more threads about what to do with someone's own stuff than about what to do against someone else's; most of the "how to deal with X" threads seem to address a fairly broad X (how do I play into Circle with my Legion, for instance) and they almost automatically get fairly broad replies; and the few really specific "this one list is giving me problems" topics are usually about lists like Denny1 Ghost Fleet or some other meta stomper - I'll happily discuss how to deal with GF in general if you can't or won't countertech with RFP, but the problem is that that kind of thing doesn't really cut it against the actual meta boogeymen. In those cases, such as GF with Denny1 instead of GF in general, I rarely have answers I would consider valid myself that don't involve "bring X and Y, you need it to counter A and B".
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jul 31, 2017 1:00:02 GMT
I defaniteley see your point. But with lists like Deny 1 ghost fleet and most of Cygnars gunlines or Jack Spam of all flavors, Most of the game is sadly played out just during List construction. I can see that to an extent, but in my opinion caster suggestions should be the last suggestions you make (Unless you think that caster is downright awful). You like using an anti infantry caster? Shore up their weaknesses with a Jr. for instance. If we're talking any kind of competitive play, then...no. I disagree. In the current meta, you must have a list which can drop substantial amounts of RFP and have access to magic weapons for Ghost Fleet. you must have a list which can handle a Cygnar gunline, AND a Haley2 Heavy Metal list. You must have a list which can handle a Khador/Amon/Ret jackspam (or you have to hope to dodge.) These aren't negotiable criteria - you will lose if you run into most of the above lists with something that isn't teched (at least to some extent) for the matchup. There's no amount of counterplay that's going to make up for good list construction - playing into ghost fleet, for instance, requires both good play (you have to get your RFP to their leader models) and good list construction (you need to HAVE the RFP, as well as some way of keeping your caster from getting incidentally assassinated.) Each of those gearchecks in some way narrows the available competitive list selection. If I want to counter ghost fleet in Ret, I'm playing some variant of Shadows (and there are limited casters that run it well) or Ossyan. If I'm trying to counter a gunline with Circle, I'm playing Baldur2 or Wurmwood. It's part of the reason why I hate gearchecks. Simply telling someone to play better (or even how to play better) isn't helpful if they're staring down a 70/30 (or worse) matchup from the moment the game starts.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jul 31, 2017 1:16:55 GMT
I defaniteley see your point. But with lists like Deny 1 ghost fleet and most of Cygnars gunlines or Jack Spam of all flavors, Most of the game is sadly played out just during List construction. As someone who sometimes still loses games I really could have won only because of bad deployment and unpacking, I don't know about that. I do still see a lot going on in terms of positioning, dealing with terrain, and so on. I do think you can build a reasonable pairing and at least make a game of it most of the time. There will be times, especially in high-level play, where neither player makes a big mistake and the dice stay sane so the matchup is the only deciding factor left. That or who went first.
|
|
|
Post by Azahul on Jul 31, 2017 1:28:51 GMT
If we're talking any kind of competitive play, then...no. I disagree. In the current meta, you must have a list which can drop substantial amounts of RFP and have access to magic weapons for Ghost Fleet. you must have a list which can handle a Cygnar gunline, AND a Haley2 Heavy Metal list. You must have a list which can handle a Khador/Amon/Ret jackspam (or you have to hope to dodge.) These aren't negotiable criteria - you will lose if you run into most of the above lists with something that isn't teched (at least to some extent) for the matchup. There's no amount of counterplay that's going to make up for good list construction - playing into ghost fleet, for instance, requires both good play (you have to get your RFP to their leader models) and good list construction (you need to HAVE the RFP, as well as some way of keeping your caster from getting incidentally assassinated.) Each of those gearchecks in some way narrows the available competitive list selection. If I want to counter ghost fleet in Ret, I'm playing some variant of Shadows (and there are limited casters that run it well) or Ossyan. If I'm trying to counter a gunline with Circle, I'm playing Baldur2 or Wurmwood. It's part of the reason why I hate gearchecks. Simply telling someone to play better (or even how to play better) isn't helpful if they're staring down a 70/30 (or worse) matchup from the moment the game starts. Actually, there is one caveat to the above, and that's that you can win any game with a strong assassination play. Recursion is irrelevant if all you need to do is clear a path to Deneghra, Haley2's indomitable attrition and scenario play avails her little if you can get a bead on her, and so on. At least one list in every pair should have a strong assassination game plan, one you can fall back on against any list you can't otherwise beat on attrition. Ideally both lists in a pair should have some sort of way to do this. If all else fails, advice on overcoming the usual challenges faced in assassinating one of these problem 'casters probably wouldn't go amiss.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jul 31, 2017 1:33:45 GMT
If we're talking any kind of competitive play, then...no. I disagree. In the current meta, you must have a list which can drop substantial amounts of RFP and have access to magic weapons for Ghost Fleet. you must have a list which can handle a Cygnar gunline, AND a Haley2 Heavy Metal list. You must have a list which can handle a Khador/Amon/Ret jackspam (or you have to hope to dodge.) These aren't negotiable criteria - you will lose if you run into most of the above lists with something that isn't teched (at least to some extent) for the matchup. There's no amount of counterplay that's going to make up for good list construction - playing into ghost fleet, for instance, requires both good play (you have to get your RFP to their leader models) and good list construction (you need to HAVE the RFP, as well as some way of keeping your caster from getting incidentally assassinated.) Each of those gearchecks in some way narrows the available competitive list selection. If I want to counter ghost fleet in Ret, I'm playing some variant of Shadows (and there are limited casters that run it well) or Ossyan. If I'm trying to counter a gunline with Circle, I'm playing Baldur2 or Wurmwood. It's part of the reason why I hate gearchecks. Simply telling someone to play better (or even how to play better) isn't helpful if they're staring down a 70/30 (or worse) matchup from the moment the game starts. Actually, there is one caveat to the above, and that's that you can win any game with a strong assassination play. Recursion is irrelevant if all you need to do is clear a path to Deneghra, Haley2's indomitable attrition and scenario play avails her little if you can get a bead on her, and so on. At least one list in every pair should have a strong assassination game plan, one you can fall back on against any list you can't otherwise beat on attrition. Ideally both lists in a pair should have some sort of way to do this. If all else fails, advice on overcoming the usual challenges faced in assassinating one of these problem 'casters probably wouldn't go amiss. Agreed. That's one of the things I love about Grissel 2.
|
|
|
Post by Big Fat Troll on Jul 31, 2017 1:47:35 GMT
Anyway, specifically to the topic- I would like to see more discussion of tactics, especially because that is where I personally am weakest. It's just that I think these things are easier to teach and learn in a more visual format. Have you guys seen the videos that Will Hungerford has started doing with Beasts of War? youtu.be/0Xs_mf6ybxwI also think that Jaden and others have done some good work on advice on the scenarios and so on.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jul 31, 2017 1:47:59 GMT
If we're talking any kind of competitive play, then...no. I disagree. In the current meta, you must have a list which can drop substantial amounts of RFP and have access to magic weapons for Ghost Fleet. you must have a list which can handle a Cygnar gunline, AND a Haley2 Heavy Metal list. You must have a list which can handle a Khador/Amon/Ret jackspam (or you have to hope to dodge.) These aren't negotiable criteria - you will lose if you run into most of the above lists with something that isn't teched (at least to some extent) for the matchup. There's no amount of counterplay that's going to make up for good list construction - playing into ghost fleet, for instance, requires both good play (you have to get your RFP to their leader models) and good list construction (you need to HAVE the RFP, as well as some way of keeping your caster from getting incidentally assassinated.) Each of those gearchecks in some way narrows the available competitive list selection. If I want to counter ghost fleet in Ret, I'm playing some variant of Shadows (and there are limited casters that run it well) or Ossyan. If I'm trying to counter a gunline with Circle, I'm playing Baldur2 or Wurmwood. It's part of the reason why I hate gearchecks. Simply telling someone to play better (or even how to play better) isn't helpful if they're staring down a 70/30 (or worse) matchup from the moment the game starts. Actually, there is one caveat to the above, and that's that you can win any game with a strong assassination play. Recursion is irrelevant if all you need to do is clear a path to Deneghra, Haley2's indomitable attrition and scenario play avails her little if you can get a bead on her, and so on. At least one list in every pair should have a strong assassination game plan, one you can fall back on against any list you can't otherwise beat on attrition. Ideally both lists in a pair should have some sort of way to do this. If all else fails, advice on overcoming the usual challenges faced in assassinating one of these problem 'casters probably wouldn't go amiss. Sure. assassination is always on the table (though it's immeasurably harder to assassinate when it's your only real play, and the opponent knows it's your only real play.) However, a list with RFP tech can pressure assassination just as much as one without, but doesn't have to give up the scenario/attrition game. Same goes for an anti-gunline list, or ANY hear check list - yeah, you can assassinate, but it's not good to go into a matchup with that being your only viable play.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jul 31, 2017 1:58:49 GMT
I understand what you're saying rowdy. But i feel like that comes with the territory of a game where a good portion of the players are mega competitive. Like it becomes less about strategy and more about optimization. The game has power level imbalances and optimization becomes important in the goal of getting the best possible. Like if you had perfect balance you would get a discussion on stratedy. Like chess or go. But even then the proper moves and responses have been figured out. And how do you counter this moves turns into do this or this or this.
|
|