New P-unit for thug route

[Dax]

PA are by far the best robo branch for attacking with.

Aren't weighed out by the wonder that is Cyborg Gardening though, on top of the Shield Androids.
I respect your view, and understand it, but I still rate Shields more.
On the subject of anti-NLT though, generally speaking you should of killed any SA player by the second tick, and the ALL targetting should be cleaning out those pesky SGT. It still doesn't really answer my point on NLT in general, though.

 

[Max]

This.

NLT massing is a brilliant method for alliance supporting. Use of Hoolies and Arsonists can contribute to the success of attacks and defences in equal amounts alike.

I have to say that I love nutters as well, although they need lower INIT so they fire just before harriers imo.

Well I rate bring back them firing in all ticks and becoming real ALL flak again. Gem of a unit.

Back on topic, I completely agree with Dax here. Have them fire on ALL ticks and preferably before yobs at the very least, and it's a useful unique unit again. Then all you've got to do is to scale the price accordingly, but I think around £10k-£15k would do it nicely.

Let's make the nutter a great unit again

 

[Dax]

Back on topic, I completely agree with Dax here. Have them fire on ALL ticks and preferably before yobs at the very least, and it's a useful unique unit again. Then all you've got to do is to scale the price accordingly, but I think around £10k-£15k would do it nicely.

Let's make the nutter a great unit again

Bam! Constructive contribution returns!
But really, it was brilliant as it was, and what the hell is the point in having Dogs and Nutters as close firing - It leaves the route totally exposed to absolutely everything. Give a player some sort of option to use the route without TL, by utilising Nutters/Dogs/Hoolies/Terrors - I'm sure this combo will stump up some extremely interesting results.
It will also make the game more accessible to those that either don't want to purchase P-Units, or can't have P-Units. Simple.

 

[willymchilybily]

hooligans did pretty nicely vs armour from what ive seen and done. arsonists. not so much, not thier design, but they make poms easy targets. and maybe helped clear a little flak so hooligans got improved ratio on non pom targets. but its doubtful. also eta 1 very useful in attacks or defence. and pa's dont seem to hurt me anyway. they hurt arsonists marginaly more, but still nothing to worry about, from my limited experiences. arsonist is excellent unit. and i wish i had more oppertunity to see it work with an sa/vamp route heavy alliance play, and prevent pomming/guru.

but on to the original topic, i dont see the point in a cheap health based unit that fires at all before hooligan being of any use....you have terrorits to fire at flak. and the only thing that fires between your hooligans and TL's is the harrier. which hoolis get nice ratios on. and are useful therefore to stop harrier rushing.

i just dont see the point. Unless you do a straight switch TL for a cheap moderately overpowered HD based NLT p-unit. maybe it will make it a bit easier for you to take out rangers. and land them. not that it was hard. wont make many odds to hitting strikers. except you wont kill them. and probably wont stop the apaches killing your flak.

doesnt bring much to the table imo. just allows people to play in a style that makes them marginally harder to kill. but by removing that last scary lethal from your midst. (the TL) i think you become a better target not a worse one. also you need extra terrorists to make up for it. (biker to scare off poms) or another unit. not like TL as mentioned. to flak stop (targetting all or even better innocent)
but then you have no real meat to the route. what do you attack when you have innocent stoppers and hooligans, what route dop you try to land? as lethals in striker route (apache) or anything in the robo route. will eat your flak. and hoolis althopugh useful arent any good alone. maybe a ranger or two if they dont have f117's...

back to my original view point.....there is no point or purpose. you need to rethink the NLT's purpose and how it can help you do something you might otherwise struggle to do.

 

[Dax]

back to my original view point.....there is no point or purpose. you need to rethink the NLT's purpose and how it can help you do something you might otherwise struggle to do.

It serves a faster, yet more perishable, blocker unit.
Arsonists have ridiculous ratios on NLD units in comparison to the extremely specialist Biker, which don't even get 1:1 on PoMs.
Like the ideal of the NLD, an NLT is a more effective (yet cheaper) alternative to LETs. You just need another unit (the Nutter) to be added to fill the gap of NLT-health damage.

 

[Max]

back to my original view point.....there is no point or purpose. you need to rethink the NLT's purpose and how it can help you do something you might otherwise struggle to do.

It serves a faster, yet more perishable, blocker unit.
Arsonists have ridiculous ratios on NLD units in comparison to the extremely specialist Biker, which don't even get 1:1 on PoMs.
Like the ideal of the NLD, an NLT is a more effective (yet cheaper) alternative to LETs. You just need another unit (the Nutter) to be added to fill the gap of NLT-health damage.

Dax is absolutely right. A health damaging NLT unit at range will uncover a whole new playstyle, you could play a pure NLT route you could attack with for example. Yet, in line with the thug route, it is very easy to kill, with the right units that is!

I wouldn't necessarily make it a P-Unit though, rather just upgrade the current form of the nutter perhaps. Ultimately, it can be used for support in alliances... or help to clear flak so that Golems / Sorcs can be more effective... or even prevent a few SAs / Vamps firing if it was made to fire early enough. It should be a versatile support unit, that can be used in any and all situations to potentially make the difference between landing and not!

At least those are just a few ideas, but certainly not useless (I don't think!)

 

[Dax]

back to my original view point.....there is no point or purpose. you need to rethink the NLT's purpose and how it can help you do something you might otherwise struggle to do.

It serves a faster, yet more perishable, blocker unit.
Arsonists have ridiculous ratios on NLD units in comparison to the extremely specialist Biker, which don't even get 1:1 on PoMs.
Like the ideal of the NLD, an NLT is a more effective (yet cheaper) alternative to LETs. You just need another unit (the Nutter) to be added to fill the gap of NLT-health damage.

Dax is absolutely right. A health damaging NLT unit at range will uncover a whole new playstyle, you could play a pure NLT route you could attack with for example. Yet, in line with the thug route, it is very easy to kill, with the right units that is!

I wouldn't necessarily make it a P-Unit though, rather just upgrade the current form of the nutter perhaps. Ultimately, it can be used for support in alliances... or help to clear flak so that Golems / Sorcs can be more effective... or even prevent a few SAs / Vamps firing if it was made to fire early enough. It should be a versatile support unit, that can be used in any and all situations to potentially make the difference between landing and not!

At least those are just a few ideas, but certainly not useless (I don't think!)

Well it would certainly give a good boost to attacking, if it were a PU for the Nutter sub-route - Reason I say this particularly, is you combine an ALL firing revamped Nutter, and the early-firing Terrorist, and flak those with Dogs? I mean, it's not amazing alone, but that can be a fearsome addition to a defensive battle report, when you consider that these units are all well below the value of a LET equivalent.

 

[Davs]

Having just massed hoolies and nutters this round, my only real criticism for the way nutters are is that they fire a tiny bit too late. If they're made so they fire just before harriers, they'd be a spectacular unit. Also, value-wise they do a decent amount more HD than hoolies do, which is generally a good thing on the last tick.

 

[Max]

Having just massed hoolies and nutters this round, my only real criticism for the way nutters are is that they fire a tiny bit too late. If they're made so they fire just before harriers, they'd be a spectacular unit. Also, value-wise they do a decent amount more HD than hoolies do, which is generally a good thing on the last tick.

In that case, perhaps change them to fire before harriers, but improve them so that they can help with stopping flak on the last tick?

Could either make them fire at ALL, last tick only.

or

Change their targetting to LET INN ALL.

or

Improve the HD so that it can be used for stopping flak more efficiently.


I still get the impression they need improving to obtain better ratios, including a marginal cost reduction tbh. I can see their uses, but I still think that improvements must be made

 

[Davs]

Yeh, actually, I'd agree that they need to be better at stoppong flak, so I'd support giving them a bit of extra HD, as I'd still prefer them to be primarily for blocking armoured LETs

 

[LAFiN]

Yeh, actually, I'd agree that they need to be better at stoppong flak, so I'd support giving them a bit of extra HD, as I'd still prefer them to be primarily for blocking armoured LETs

Isn't that why you have Terrorists and Attack Dogs?

 

[willymchilybily]

this discussion has now lost me lol.

i agree though if instead of a punit you were to buff the nutter so the route is more NLT orientated, it woulde be nice for alliance play.

firing all, and shooting before harrier = nice. it serves a purpose. and you can use the terrorists to sweep the flak from almost any target. due to thier high init. before lethals fire. The hoolis could strip for the nutters to do HD.

problem would be though your route now has few enemies. sure an sa or vamp could kill, off your terrors. but sorcs and golems would now fire after your nlt's (nutters buffed) so would be far less effective when you have flak home.

though i guess the original suggestion a unit to fire before the hooligan. fire at health, maybe before sa/vamp and target all. (leaving nutter alone) mean you can sweep the flak with it. or use the terrorist, and the NLT fires after getting 30% more firepower on the remaining lethals and nld/nlt. but still unless it is strong enough to stop sa/vamp reasonably well, i dont seeing it being that useful or niche.

 

[Dax]

though i guess the original suggestion a unit to fire before the hooligan. fire at health, maybe before sa/vamp and target all

This would make sense for a PU, but my main issue is with the Nutter unit.
With Dav's feedback, clearly we need some ideas to make NLT as useful as NLD, but in a different field. Then disables become more than just an additive to blocking land attacks.

The Nutter needs to be an ALL firing unit, in all 3 ticks, and firing just after the Hooligan. The reason I say this, is to re-introduce the use of the Terrorist, which on the whole is not very often utilised.

The PU could utilise the afore-mentioned idea, as this will give it some sort of defensive purpose to deal with units such as the Vampire and SA, who threaten somebody taking this NLT unit over the TL.
Of course, for it to be a valid PU choice, it MUST serve as critical a role as the Terrorist Leader PU does. Obviously this in itself belies a challenge, but combining this NLT unit with Hoolies and the Petrol Bomber sub-route, you can have a good early firing unit, and some LETs that serve a very worthwhile service on the side for BHing. Or combining it with arsonist route gives you something that when combined with Thieves and the other units, allows fast attacks which are effective on a 1v1 basis. And with Attack Dogs and the new Nutter, you can serve multiple roles, whilst having a LET flak unit, the Heavy Thug, and the Biker.

These ideas bring flexibility and more importantly, a unique identity (as Protestor route gets access to Thug route's only PU, with the addition of the very powerful NLD blockers), to a route which generally speaking is just very bland and repetitive.