kyussinchains wrote:
I struggle to win many games with Vior'la in my local meta, what kind of lists are you facing and using against it? I'd be keen to see a take on a suit-heavy OP list as I find myself wishing for that 3rd skyray most of the time
Basically full WE in the first versions of this list, today almost full WE with the preceptive pathfinder formations to unlock the WE and use markerlights...
Usually in minigeddon or 2000 points games... So you can imagine results.
CarlixTomix wrote:
No offense, but this makes very little sense to me. Heavy battlesuits were already limited in the transition from the previous iteration of Vior'la list to this one, as they were core before.
Other than that, you probably didn't notice that core to support ratio is 1:2 for Vior'la list (its 1:3 in Third sphere list), and making it 1:1 would definitely cripple the list.
Said to you a lot of times. Even yesterday by whatsapp...
It would definitely cripple the list as you play the mandatory core to use as much WE as you can. Usially in minigeddon or 2000 points lists, as you know...
CarlixTomix wrote:
If anything, Vior'la lost range comparing to the Third sphere expansion Tau list, as for example every Hammerheads version has a more range than its equivalent Heavy Battlesuit version, or fire warriors losing their 30 cm range shot.
Vior'la list capitalizes on the 15-45cm range while Third Sphere feels more comfortable at 30-75cm range.
Only Supremacy and Stormsurge are an exception to this.
You barely used hammerheads. They're much less durable than WE battlesuits as you know. And tell me you don't use Supremacy and Stormsurge...
CarlixTomix wrote:
About the "without any handicap" part, Vior'la lost Tetras and piranhas, as they are a mere upgrade to a 200 points formation instead of a super cheap formation itself.
Also, Vior'la lost Barracudas in exchange for Razorsharks, and while they are good enough their cost is 200 points instead of 150, losing some list flexibility.
Not to mention Tigersharks AX-1-0.
Tetras and piranhas formations can be replaced with pathfinders w/transports, almost with te same function, price, but increased durability (infantry in cover thanks to vehicles). So...
CarlixTomix wrote:
This is weird, I didn't have any good results in my local meta and the other players agree that it's underperforming right now.
Could you please bring us more information on what list did you play against?
You always say "this is weird", "it makes no sense", but all of us told you... Using that list you lost just once, vs AMTL full of long range MW...
gunslinger007 wrote:
@Cachivachi: I appreciate you weighing in with your concerns. Could you provide a little more detail on your games to help give a better perspective? Specifically, what list build your group finds to be OP, maybe specific units and what folks don't like about them, and what lists are struggling against them.
I have to disagree about this list not losing anything from third sphere. Three major losses include:
1) no hammerheads, which means no hover tanks avoiding CC and popping up behind cover;
2) loss of cheap recon formations, which are key to the popular high activation "pop corn" tau lists and a great for screening and setting up Combined Fire first term alpha strikes;
3) general loss of range. Most of the list functions at a max of 45cm. Third Sphere uses the hammerheads to shoot up advancing forces as they close.
I'm not discounting what you're saying, I want to have a better perspective on your concerns. There could be an aspect or stress test not previously considered, it's why we have open testing! I've worked to try and keep heavy suits from being too competitive when spammed, but maybe another look is necessary.
I will add, if someone is choosing to play a list that's boring to play against doesn't necessarily mean it's also OP unless it's easily rolling opponents and lists are struggling to find ways to beat it. Maybe a rule similar to the Aussie's DBAD could help at tournaments.
Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk
Hi. Basically think that this list is OP in minigeddon and <2000 point games, due to WE spam. And keeps competitive in >2000 point games.
About what you say about the lacks of this list:
Hammerheads - Very vulnerable to artillery or teleporting units. Long range WE suits much more robust in this role. Not a "glass hammer" as the hammerheads are.
Lost of cheap recon - They mantain pathfinders as core options, wich are cheap too, and can be used as screen with increased durability (because are infantry) and can be almost as mobile as tetras are.
General loss of range - Totally disagree, Basically because of Stormsurge long range fire (1x MW3+, 2xAT5 guided) and Supremacy, wich can be spammed at will. Plus having new indirect fire capability with 3rd phase lacks. All of this units with increased survival capabilities with better armor and WE rules.
Nonetheless, Vior'la keeps Manta and Orca to deploy short range units everywhere, mantaining good antiair capabilities, and with new AT/antiWE weapons.
Just my opinion. All of the exposed pretends to be constructive criticism. Please, take it this way. Maybe it has been said in a rough way because my english is not the best.
To finnish, as a funny curiosity, here, in our local NetEA group, we made a joke: "To r ape*" is translated to spanish as "Violar". We call this list, when used by CarlixTomix, "Lista de Violar" or "R ape list" in a friendly way.
* Forum didn't let me put this word. It's just a curiosity. If someone thinks it's not apropiate, i will erase it.