Actually that's a very fall assumption for you to be making based of the fact the only armies I've bothered to describe have been this one and ML.

Spoken by someone who's never faced me, or my builds. Pretty easy to dismiss the simpler ones I post on here as being unsubtle when you haven't had your arse handed to you by them. And well, given you haven't faced or seen the subtle ones either...

Cecil Neumann is 12 points for a +2/+1/+1 pilot. Recruitment is 5 pts to any faction except CJF/HL which he's restricted against. So say CSF and poof, yer exactly at 600 points.

And I'm sorry. You got personal and I reacted. I should know better.

Let's get this straight. You said that multiple BAP are obnoxious. I took that to mean they are overpowered because obnoxious is quite an insulting adjective.

All I am trying to say is that whilst they do give you a serious advantage over formation bonuses (usable by multiple units, usable in assault orders, etc) they are balanced.

I see them as balanced by several factors.

• They are usable by mediums only which have an achilles heel - fragile, costly, low damage, whatever.
• They cost 35 points each
• Furthermore there is an "opportunity cost" in that you have to give up either a pilot or another gear, though that's true of any gear choice I tend to value gear as much on how often it is used as how powerful it is in very specific circumstances (whichever way you ice it, these rely on very situational builds and the example you quote is a good example of a build that uses them well).
• The offending units have to be within 6" of the intended target.

These features, for me, balance the power. You can achieve similar effects for less cost using transports and formations. They are less flexible as you rightly point out but they cost less.

So as far as I am concerned multiple Beagles are an interesting one-trick pony (and I have had success with one trick ponies before so I'm really not knocking it when I say that) but they are not, to my mind, "obnoxious". So maybe you and I have different opinions on what is "obnoxious". The point is, in order to use the ability you have to sacrifice a lot and that, to me, is balance.

I can't give in without one more shot at what you said though ... :)

In fact you'll find few competitive medium combinations that cheap.



I don't build or strategise on the assumption that my opponent is stupid. I strategise and build on the assumption they are better than me. So I darn well better be able to cope with them being able to counter anything I do that is quite so telegraphed as taking multiple BAP.

In other words I presume my opponent is very good until they prove otherwise. Meaning I'm generally only caught out by my own incompetence (and yes, that happens).



[quote]And that same bishop can be countered even easier. [quote]
Indeed? Based on the assumption that the Bishop and Thunderbirds (costing 100 points or so) comes with 100 points worth of deterrent, I don't think so....



Yes and no. Isn't that what battle is about? Second-guessing your opponent? I'm a statistician by trade (not exactly but close enough for the forums) and I work on probabilities. I never gamble. That goes for games too. I am never coy to admit that where two strategies present themselves and one involves greater risk, I feel more comfortable with the one involving the lesser risk. I know I reflect just one aspect of the strategic spectrum and I make no pretense of being anything else.

And yet I occasionally play all-'Mech. Go figure!!

Oh and the only time I played 'Mechless (competitively and not forced by the Storyline) was 2 weeks ago.