Page 1 of 1

Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: March 30th, 2016, 3:56 pm
by zomburs
First off, I'm pretty new, so bare with me this may be knee-jerk reactionary.

In the limited games I have played so far link teams seem pretty powerful, and the only counter to them that I have found that has a decent chance of working is surprise AOEs to break them. Mainly this is because typically their BS is higher and they have a great to good burst depending on whos turn it is so F2F rolls can go bad quickly. Now with Tag link teams are coming out with HS3 Im not certain on how to deal with them, although Id wager AOEs will not cut it. Haris link teams will now add more link teams to the sectorials as well.

Do most people find going vanilla for variety is not worth the trade off of not having the oppressive fire power of the link team or am I missing something?

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: March 30th, 2016, 5:06 pm
by H1ghlander
Some people only play Vanilla because they can take more similar troops over multiple different units (Chasseur and Foxtrot, for example).

Granted, link teams are good, but we don't know how they'll change in N3HS. However, based on the current rules iteration, surprise AOE attacks are a good way of dealing with them. Another way is 'slinging the pie', where you position troops so only one link member can see your model. You then engage that link member with a weapon/model that makes the shoot-out unfavourable for them (sniper vs rifle, for example). Another way is balls to the walls offence with a DTW (chain rifle, heavy flame thrower). Such weapon should be able to hit 2 or 3 members, and then forces the link player to Dodge with the entire link, or potentially lose link members. If the link dodges, your model will still be alive, and then you can rinse and repeat for your next order. I'm most familiar with Ariadna, but I believe every vanilla army has tools such as these to deal with link teams.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: March 30th, 2016, 7:15 pm
by Pierzasty
H1ghlander wrote:Another way is 'slinging the pie', where you position troops so only one link member can see your model.

Better version: if a link is hidden behind one terrain obstacle like a barricade/wall/building, remember that models have silhouette cylinders and the first model will often block LOF of those behind them. A semi-suicide close-range shotgun strike is devastating in those situations. You have +6 to hit, the link has to declare the same ARO so if the first guy shoots at you, the others stand there and take the template if he fails. If they dodge, no one in the link shoots at you. Very nasty with cheap AD or fast drones.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 1st, 2016, 6:42 am
by schoon
...or in other words, while Link Teams seem like the cool new toy from all the attention and videos lavished upon them this week, they also have their weaknesses.

Weaknesses that some troops are quite good at exploiting.

I'd hold off a while before declaring the death of the Vanilla list.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 1st, 2016, 9:56 am
by VisOne
This is a question that needs a good 2 or some months to be answered more definitive once we see exactly what HSN3 brings to the table not only for Sectorials but Vanilla.

As it stands today I favour sectorials in some faction and Vanilla in others but thats because I put little or NO value in cheap LI defensive links. So sectorials where this is the often voiced value in taking it I laugh off and take Vanilla instead Ariadna, Haqqislam and what not for example.

If nothing else now is easily the best time to be in the game and asking these questions as the rules have being play tested, gamed and broken for years as opposed to when Links first game into the game and Campaign Paradiso was released and we had to learn all the BS the hard way.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 2nd, 2016, 9:59 am
by Section9
Some army builds are really only possible in Vanilla, like Ariadna camospam or Haqq dudespam.

Other builds are best realized in sectorials, like the various biker gangs (JSA, USARF, or Kum)

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 2nd, 2016, 12:51 pm
by VisOne
Kum is as of today Vanilla only.

Its hilarious and easily the most expensive force you could build not points wise but actual money.

Image

Image

Image

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 2nd, 2016, 1:25 pm
by Prophet_of_Doom
Are they even successful, Damien?

Independent of that, you managed to impress us with both your guts to get this force and the looks of it!

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 2nd, 2016, 1:26 pm
by Pierzasty
I love the pair of Nasmats on a bike.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 2nd, 2016, 5:27 pm
by Claudius Sol
It's about Quality, not Quantity.

Aragoto4Lyfe

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2016, 6:51 am
by VisOne
Prophet_of_Doom wrote:Are they even successful, Damien?

Independent of that, you managed to impress us with both your guts to get this force and the looks of it!


I'm not Damien but yes he has being successful with that force in the past his usual Vanilla lists have at least 2 Kum in it as well as multiple other Impetuous Troops.

Damien is a very good Haqqislam player almost always placing high with his force in tournaments here in Australia 1st at Cancon 2015 and 2nd (pretty sure he came 2nd) or 3rd this year in Cancon 2016 which is our National event.

Re: Is vanilla worth the trade off

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2016, 9:07 am
by Section9
VisOne wrote:Kum is as of today Vanilla only.

Says something about how often I've played Haqq...

Its hilarious and easily the most expensive force you could build not points wise but actual money.

[ img ]

[img ]

[img ]

Oh, god, that beautiful army! Love it! My wallet winces as I recognize all the piecesparts used in the conversions, though.