Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Mission Impossible? Bring Your A-Game

  1. #1
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061

    Mission Impossible? Bring Your A-Game

    So, chat and the forums are rife with flavor of the week builds and balance discussions. Understandable.

    My friends, your mission, should you choose to accept it...is to Post your counter build and winning strategy versus the flavor of the week! (If this proves successful, we'll turn this into a series as the flavor builds change )

    That's right, this is a thread to find OP builds that are even more OP than what we thought was OP! HA!

    SO without further ado.

    2 SA 2 TS 2 high str VARL

    Counter...


    MISSION START!
    Last edited by raven2134; 04-01-2013 at 09:01 AM.

  2. #2
    3 raiders with 12 str 3 exertion, 2 high str varl and one SS

    super lower armor build which relies on first hit and instant killing/maiming while high varl hunt high varl with SS support to also make sure they get first hit.

  3. #3
    Provoker might also be useful to pin down maimed thrashers and stop them from using their flail. Maybe some raidmasters to absorb thrasher and SA damage. Tirean's also right that skystrikers would be really useful to prevent varl movement. With the proviso that no counter is perfect, I'd personally go (in no particular order):

    1 Provoker (unit control)
    1 Warmaster (maim/break)
    2 Raidmaster (defence/break)
    1 Skystriker (unit control)
    1 Bowmaster (ranged break)

  4. #4
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    I had a match as the infamous 2SA/2TH/2war (boo me !) against a 3TH/SS/SRM/WH (or was it WH/WM?), with high str and ex on the THs ; which is to say pretty much exactly the build Tirean described. I don't remember the details, and a good part of it is probably due to me not playing very well, but I do remember taking a a jolly good beating.
    It was at power 12, and the trashers were r3 while the rest was r1.
    I don't have the units to test that build, but it seemed to have the potential to steamroll most builds with a smirk on its crazy face.
    Something tells me the 3TH build is going to see a lot of use in the p12 metagame.
    (at least I hope it or something else without 2SA in it will...)

    TL;DR Surprise ! Tirean is (probably) very right, as usual.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Butters View Post
    I had a match as the infamous 2SA/2TH/2war (boo me !) against a 3TH/SS/SRM/WH (or was it WH/WM?), with high str and ex on the THs ; which is to say pretty much exactly the build Tirean described. I don't remember the details, and a good part of it is probably due to me not playing very well, but I do remember taking a a jolly good beating.
    It was at power 12, and the trashers were r3 while the rest was r1.
    I don't have the units to test that build, but it seemed to have the potential to steamroll most builds with a smirk on its crazy face.
    Something tells me the 3TH build is going to see a lot of use in the p12 metagame.
    (at least I hope it or something else without 2SA in it will...)

    TL;DR Surprise ! Tirean is (probably) very right, as usual.
    Can the backbiter miss with it's strength damage? I've only just started using them, but their 2 armor 1 str damage is almost as good as flail plus extra mobility and if you ever have one late game with high str they're pretty deadly. I can only imagine what a R3 backbiter can do.

  6. #6
    It can miss haeso, it uses the same % shots as a normal str attacked.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Tirean View Post
    It can miss haeso, it uses the same % shots as a normal str attacked.
    Ah, thank you. Still a big fan, 12/10/4/0/3 hasn't let me down yet.
    Last edited by Haeso; 04-02-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  8. #8
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Haeso View Post
    12/10/4/0/3 hasn't let me down yet.
    No exertion? I personally have them topped on that. Why? Cuz I save my BB for late-match sweeping, so he's bound to need some EX in order to apply that crucial last STR damage that kills a unit or be able to cross the map in a flash! OK, with the Run-Through, his effective walk-range is almost doubled, but with 3EX he can travel a staggering 4+3+[2+Rank]=12 tiles (max, at Rank3 Run-Through) !!!

  9. #9
    I use 3xRM's, 1x BM, 1 x WM and 1x WH.
    The RM's do the breaking early on as almost suicide squads whilst the Varls and BM stay back. the BM uses BoP at range puncturing those broken by the RM's and block the opponent from getting to me until they get within range then ensuring I get first strike with the War's to do the massive damage.

  10. #10
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOpener View Post
    I use 3xRM's, 1x BM, 1 x WM and 1x WH.
    Seems formidable enough build, and the battle-plan can't get any sounder. It's a fairly popular approach though, so, what's the standard counter-plan for it? It's good to be aware of the bottlenecks of one's strategy!

    I'd say: Some SSing to halt the raiders' advance? Some S&Bing to force sweeper-varls into stalling vs. losing STR? Spreading the units at initial-deployment to limit the Shield-Walling? Regarding sweeper-varls, I guess its always a matter of who gets the first hit in, so that greatly depends on how well you play it.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Butters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    303
    Against HO's build, I'd say the same (some RMs of your own) would be very effective. The point is to get past his RMs and get one hit on his BM and each raider, drastically reducing their efficiency. The point is, he will be doing the same to you, so you need to have a more robust back line, with maybe a SRM or PK.
    I don't have much experience with or against 3 RM, so I could be completely off the mark here..

  12. #12
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Butters View Post
    Against HO's build, I'd say the same (some RMs of your own) would be very effective.
    Starting to look more like chess, eh? So it'd start to depend greatly on how well you play-it out, with tiny differences having a big impact etc. Personally, I rue the day when a definitely-optimal build emerges, and all Factions battles fall into clear patterns. Well... That kinda brings it back to that "wild/new" ideas-thread (alternative deployments, texas hold'em, double-or-nothing etc) I started a while ago, now, doesn't it?

    How should the latest popular 2SA/2TH/2Wx build play against this more conventional one (3RM/1BM/2Wx)?

  13. #13
    Member Leartes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Aachen - Germany
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    Personally, I rue the day when a definitely-optimal build emerges, and all Factions battles fall into clear patterns.
    Fortunately, this day will never come for several reasons. a) A build to rule them all is per definition imbalanced. This is an undesirable feature and therefore it will be patched. b) asymmetric games feature an inherent rock-paper-scissors element. In TBS:F this is not explicit like in other games, but I think it holds for most units and builds - especially since by point a all build that don't feature this are imbalanced and get patched.


    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    How should the latest popular 2SA/2TH/2Wx build play against this more conventional one (3RM/1BM/2Wx)?
    I'd play 1 strongarm when I have so many raidmaster, but that is me ...

    Now, I think ... *delete some theorycrafting* ... I think someone with more experience should answer that question

  14. #14
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    Starting to look more like chess, eh? So it'd start to depend greatly on how well you play-it out, with tiny differences having a big impact etc. Personally, I rue the day when a definitely-optimal build emerges, and all Factions battles fall into clear patterns. Well... That kinda brings it back to that "wild/new" ideas-thread (alternative deployments, texas hold'em, double-or-nothing etc) I started a while ago, now, doesn't it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Leartes View Post
    Fortunately, this day will never come for several reasons. a) A build to rule them all is per definition imbalanced. This is an undesirable feature and therefore it will be patched. b) asymmetric games feature an inherent rock-paper-scissors element.
    and c) new advanced classes, new basic unit types and their new advanced classes will each break the meta or at least change it so much that new builds become more powerful than fotw.

    In general stable meta situation should never take place in Factions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    How should the latest popular 2SA/2TH/2Wx build play against this more conventional one (3RM/1BM/2Wx)?
    The same as always Thrashers (or SAs) should have at least one hit on BM to render her useless for puncture. Good distance should be maintained between enemy raiders and your forces to deny getting break on your warriors. The same time you should kill raiders as soon as possible cause it's main enemy source of armor break. After that you should probably out-armor your enemy on warriors' 2v2.
    I'm writing from 3RM player perspective, so anything can be wrong here.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  15. #15
    To beat 3RM 1 BM 2 Warrior you do the same as with 2sa2TH as you would do with any other team. You try to bait the RMs to get as far away from their own team as possible. If you achieve that you proceed to beat on them. If they bring the team closer you then quickly counter and strike the 3 key threats in this build. That is the BM and 2 warriors. Once they are dealt with its time to clean up the win

    Both of those options much easier said than done mind.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by HeadOpener View Post
    I use 3xRM's, 1x BM, 1 x WM and 1x WH.
    Seems formidable enough build, and the battle-plan can't get any sounder. It's a fairly popular approach though, so, what's the standard counter-plan for it?
    Hi, don't know if I have a standard counter plan or if I was just lucky but last night in the tourney I played him twice in a row (lets praise the tourney match making once again! ) and had the lucky outcome in both battles on my side.
    I had a pretty balanced build (RM SM SA TH BM WH). I used RM SM TH to stop his RMs from approaching my frail units in the back as good as I can and hitting them as soon as they let down their shield and trying to get to his BM at the same time. I think the first game was decided because I was lucky with positioning and could hit first with my WH. In second match my WH was maimed very effectively after a RM came through with his healthy BM in the back but my SM was still strong in the endgame. Both games were pretty tight, so this is probably not a "standard counter-plan"...

    HeadOpener, I really had fun at those matches and hope you found more diverse opponents after I left after these two battles!

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloodaddict View Post
    Hi, don't know if I have a standard counter plan or if I was just lucky but last night in the tourney I played him twice in a row (lets praise the tourney match making once again! ) and had the lucky outcome in both battles on my side.
    I had a pretty balanced build (RM SM SA TH BM WH). I used RM SM TH to stop his RMs from approaching my frail units in the back as good as I can and hitting them as soon as they let down their shield and trying to get to his BM at the same time. I think the first game was decided because I was lucky with positioning and could hit first with my WH. In second match my WH was maimed very effectively after a RM came through with his healthy BM in the back but my SM was still strong in the endgame. Both games were pretty tight, so this is probably not a "standard counter-plan"...

    HeadOpener, I really had fun at those matches and hope you found more diverse opponents after I left after these two battles!
    Blood nicely put, I don't think your build was a direct counter I think you play better than I
    I play Chess well, but the time linits on this I sturggle with and get too flustered at times, my old brain can't think that fast anymore it seems. however I still love the game, I would rather have fun and lose than not play at all or..... cheat....As for following games, alas my next game which I won my opponent exploited to avoid the loss Can't wait till they fix that one. Still I got the screen shot of it and I know who they are so

    Thanks for the games was fun, I miss the chat though hearing people type whislt not being able to see it in the match is annoying!

    AS for beating it, it's about forcing the RM's away too much so the Wars have to come in so you can hit them. which you did effective first game, second was much closer you just outplayed me

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •