Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ailaros wrote:

NuggzTheNinja wrote:anecdotal evidence about killing fliers with sub-optimal weapons contributes nothing to the argument that you can play IG competitively without fliers.

I don't think you understand the idea of burden of proof. If you make the statement that it's impossible to handle fliers without vendettas, then you need only a single counterexample to prove that false (and thus, by extension, prove the opposite "it is possible to handle fliers without vendettas" to be true). Likewise, if you're going to say that you can't win a game against fliers without vendettas, then I'd need to provide only a single counterexample to prove the opposite to be true.

The real question, here, is what is your definition of "competitive"? If it means not losing a dice game ever, then we're not even remotely speaking the same language.

In any case, if you want to throw out a few games as anecdotes, rather than data points, and then say that you won't be convinced without data, then once again, the burden is on you. You have to provide enough examples of your point of view being correct by your own definition so that you have reached past the point of anecdotes into data. And you can't have lost any of them either, because your empirical approach would then be tainted by anomaly.

Good luck with that.

First of all, I never said that you can't kill fliers without Vendettas. I said that you can't kill fliers effectively without Vendettas.

As proof, I presented every game you played against Necrons that I could find in a casual search. You lost every single one, and were tabled in plenty of them.

If you want an empirical meta-analysis of all of your battle reports, I'm not going to do that. I have a job, a life, a family, etc. that prohibit me from wasting time on problems akin to proving to a blind man that the grass is green and the sky is blue. I don't really owe you any resolution to a burden of proof, as I'm not trying to convince you to take Vendettas. I'm trying to provide the OP and others in this thread with the solid information that they deserve, having asked a reasonable question.

 Peregrine wrote:


1) Is this a reliable counter, or am I hoping to get lucky to have any chance of success?

#1 can be answered in absolute terms.

This cannot be answered in absolute terms because the definition of reliable is unclear. Check out the problem with your own definition of effectiveness below to see how that can the case.

 Peregrine wrote:
A counter is effective if it is likely to get the job done, for a reasonable point cost.

This definition is vague at best. How do you definite likely? Are you saying that "getting the job done" has to be a mere 50.1% likely to happen? That would be more likely than not. As such, it would thereby satisfy your definition of what an effective counter is.

Hydras are cheap have good range and are very likely to hit aircraft. Just as reliable as flakk missiles in terms of chance to damage.

 Flinty wrote:
Hydras are cheap have good range and are very likely to hit aircraft. Just as reliable as flakk missiles in terms of chance to damage.

The problem with Hydras is that they're terrible against everything besides flyers, and fragile enough that you can't rely on having them alive by the time you're trying to shoot at flyers. This is especially true for anti-tank flyers like the Vendetta that can come on and immediately kill the Hydras.

 warpspider89 wrote:
This cannot be answered in absolute terms because the definition of reliable is unclear.

Of course it can be answered in absolute terms. Each player has their own definition of "reliable", and it's easy to set a nice absolute number of, say, 75% chance to kill and give a yes/no answer for each possible option. You can't do the same for #2 because the cost factor only exists as a comparison between two or more units, you can never look at a single unit in isolation. Therefore #1 is an absolute value and #2 is a relative value.

In the context of the post you're quoting the point was that "effective" has a relative component, you have to consider how a given option performs relative to other options before you can say whether or not it is effective. You can't just cite an anecdote about your thrown krak grenade killing a Helldrake once and claim that the krak grenade is an effective anti-flyer option.

How do you definite likely?

As said above, it depends on the player and their standards for reliability. But what we know in this case is that Vendettas are far more likely to kill flyers than LR Vanquishers, and cost a lot less. No matter what your individual threshold for reliability is the Vendetta is the obvious choice.

 Peregrine wrote:

Of course it can be answered in absolute terms. Each player has their own definition of "reliable", and it's easy to set a nice absolute number of, say, 75% chance to kill and give a yes/no answer for each possible option.

A personal definition is an arbitrary definition and those numbers would be arbitrary values of what is "reliable" not absolute values.

Can we return to the topic?

Makumba, you need to post a list of the models you have and tell us what point level you want to play at. Otherwise it is impossible to help you.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
Hydras are cheap have good range and are very likely to hit aircraft. Just as reliable as flakk missiles in terms of chance to damage.

The problem with Hydras is that they're terrible against everything besides flyers, and fragile enough that you can't rely on having them alive by the time you're trying to shoot at flyers. This is especially true for anti-tank flyers like the Vendetta that can come on and immediately kill the Hydras.

This risk can be mitigated through the use of cover and keeping the hydras in reserve. 2 hydras are effectively the same cost as 1 flyer and their presence will make your opponent treat them as a priority target protecting the rest of your force by proxy. I think the onky reason they aren't used more often is that they don't have a normally available model.

One problem with the hydra is that if it moves it can only skyfire one autocannon, and must snap fire the other one. However, because of its skyfire rule it loses little from going 12", making it a decently fast autocannon platform, which can keep up with hellhounds.

It did lose the ability to move flat out in the new IA1 though.