Jamming Barrier: an exercise in mental frustration

In response to Biggs' challenge, I'm writing this article to hopefully breathe life into what is viewed as a non-competitive objective. I start with a discussion of why it is not receiving competitive play, address the differences between it and competitive yellow objectives, explore fleet archetypes that would jive with it, then look at potential ways to tactically exploit the objective and turn it into a nightmare, and finish with a final comparison analysis followed closely by my conclusion.

Why is it noncompetitive?

Taking a look at Schmitty's regional data shows that serious players aren't taking it. It offers no point generation (half of yellow objectives), no deployment advantage (hyperspace assault, Fighter Ambush, maybe fleet Ambush...), and it has the potential to backfire (most objectives do). It also minimally affects squadrons, which currently dominate certain metas.

In my own experience with yellow objectives, my squadron builds want either Fighter Ambush or planetary ion cannon, and my ship builds want Fire Lanes or Hyperspace Assault. They generate points and offer some sort of deployment advantage. However, the advent of Strategic throws a huge curve ball into those objectives with objective tokens. I never leave home without a strategic squadron for this reason. I have completely invalidated several opponents' strategies just because I had strategic squadrons and they didn't. Strategic will be key in learning to make Jamming Barrier effective.

What does it do differently?

The main difference between JB and other yellows is that it doesn't give an inherent advantage to the second player. Other yellow objectives give you point generating tokens placed in your favor or gives you a significant deployment advantage. The advantage of JB can only be gained through precise maneuver, proper timing, and building to take advantage of it.

As with several objectives from the campaign expansion, Jamming Barrier does replace debris fields with the dust fields. This gives 6 obstacles in addition to 2 objective tokens (OTs) placed at up to range ruler length apart from each other (they don't have to be spread all the way out to distance 5, and they can go anywhere in the setup area). What do I see when I view the objective like this? I see the potential for serious engagement area development and a really cluttered battlespace. This is ideal for fragile ships commanding squadrons. Lots of obstruction, and lots of reduced dice from big guns on big ships.

Key to note: the barrier reduces attacks from ships and squadrons to half, rounded up, on the initial roll. This means that it cannot cancel an attack (unlike obstruction) and single die attacks maintain the same effectiveness. It also does not count as obstruction, so it has the potential to stack with obstruction, but those cases depend on the amount of dice in the armament. From a lengthy discussion in the rules forum, the obstruction happens first, and then the Jamming barrier. Thus, the stack only matters with odd numbered armaments.

Fleet Archetypes?

Most squadrons and small ships will not be affected. This essentially does nothing to affect the "death by a thousand cuts" lists while giving ISDs, MC80s, and anything else with a 4+ dice armament cause to pause. TRC swarms, light bomber swarms (1-die Bombers, versus heavy 2-die bombers), and ramstrosities will perform virtually unaffected.

Squadron Builds: my Pelta list (and other similar 2 carrier with 3 flotilla lists) would do well with this objective. One of my biggest weaknesses is the potential for 2 flotillas to get 1-shotted in a single, early round. I've had it happen a couple times, and it sucks, but a jamming barrier would severely reduce the potential for that, while also allowing me to fly my fleet more aggressively. The Pelta is already fairly resilient, and, the way I fly it, it likes to get in close to poop Bs all over ISDs. ISDs can one shot the Pelta with 8 dice, but a JB can turn that into a medium 4 dice attack. Jamming Barrier works well with rapid launch bays and flotillas, where you want to get close but you don't want to die...

MSU builds: these should be trickier to get a handle on than Squadron builds, as your main firepower has the potential to be reduced if you don't fly it right. Manipulating the jamming Barrier becomes much more complicated (discussed later) for that reason, and can become a real headache if your opponent also happened to bring some strategic squadrons along. Regardless, an Ackbar corvette could potentially shoot an ISD-II with 4 reds (1+CF+Ackbar) from long range while the ISD could only return 3 reds (4/2+CF). Situations like this help me understand why some players rage quit....

Ramstrosities: you can't jam a ramstrosity, but a ramstrosity can jam you. Can Jam is also a fun game, if you haven't played it.

Big Bad Wolf: this is my term for anything with those big bases, big armaments, and who really don't want to see a jamming Barrier. The addition of the dust fields make this objective (and others with dust fields) too big of a liability for fleets that rely on ship attacks. Dust fields give flotillas a hiding spot, even from Demo. I used my opponent's Close Range Intel Scan against him in my final regionals match for that very reason. Lifeboat flotilla parked at close range to an ISD. Couldn't be shot. In that sense, Jamming Barrier is an effective choice for a yellow objective if your meta has a bunch of Big Bads in it.

Black Dice Bonanza: the weakness of black dice lists is their ineffectiveness at long range. They rely on activation advantage and initiative to set up a last/first double tap. Jamming Barrier could potentially be used to protect them from medium-long range until they close the gap and use a squadron command to peel back the barrier. But I don't think it would be the most effective use of JB.

Tactical Mastery?

EADev: You will get to place at least one dust field and the station if your opponent chooses this objective. You also get to place the jamming Barrier. Try to form a near side screen around the station with the dust field and other obstacles. As far as where to place the barrier, my suggestion would be close to your intended deployment zone. And perpendicular to your forecasted direction of travel. If you have strategic squadrons. If you don't, then you chose the wrong objective. It'll take lots of playtesting to determine a solid distance, direction, and such, so I'm not going into the weeds here.

List building: 2 strategic squadrons and fighter coordination teams on a ship with at least squadron value 2. Nebs, Arqs, and Dictors are candidates. So are glads, but then you've started building to a pigeonholed objective. It could also work on corvettes if you're going the TrC90 route. This gives you super-flexibility with manipulating the barrier, while also allowing for lots of flexibility with the rest of your list. Thus, you have built for Jamming Barrier while also allowing yourself to build for your other objectives.

List deployment: I think the trick here will be to accurately predict where your opponent's big guns will go. You can influence that through baiting with an early deployment of a key ship, or through telepathing (giving the appearance of intended actions) where the bulk of your fleet will go. But that prediction should happen when you place the barrier. With an accurate prediction at that point, you will be able to move the screen with your fleet, always keeping it between you and the big guns.

Final Comparisons:

MSU Objectives: I view the Ion Cannon and Hyperspace Assault as MSU objectives. PIC gives you extra attacks and really adds to the thousand cuts aspect of MSU, while HA gives a unique deployment advantage.

It's hard to conceive of a situation where JB would be preferred to PIC. The advantage of JB over PIC, however, is that you can always deploy your fleet to take advantage of the barrier, while your opponent can deploy to avoid all but one of the ion cannons. In most scenarios, you would be able to shoot 2/3 of the ion Cannons. That's an 8 dice advantage for you. Effective use of the jamming barrier can vary widely. A squadron build wouldn't be severely affected, so you might take away 1-2 dice from enemy ship attacks, but you'll also probably do the same to yourself. 0-dice advantage. But against ISD/MC80s, your looking at major reductions. At least 8-dice advantages in your favor.

For HA, JB has the advantage of giving you more control and not taking away from your initial deployment strategy. I've played many games where my opponent brought HA, and I always chose it. They always place their tokens close by my deployment zone. I always used my VCXs to move those tokens into insta-kill zones, and delayed their HA deployment til rounds 4 or 5, taking way from their activations. JB is far less risky in that way.

Squadron Build Objectives: Contested Outpost and Fighter Ambush (PIC too, but it's already been discussed) are squadron build Yellows, IMO. CO offers a point generating method for forcing an engagement and Fighter Ambush throws in a ton of unique variables and a point generating method as well.

There is only one advantage I can think of for JB over either of these objectives: dust fields. Aside from that, Fighter Ambush could put you at a disadvantage if your opponent also brought a full bomber wing, and CO could do the same if your opponent brought black dice ships. JB does give you an advantage against the black dice ships, but it doesn't do squat against squadron builds. It basically offers a neutral ground against other squadron builds that won't really backfire in the same way as Fighter Ambush.

Conclusion: Jamming Barrier hasn't seen competitive play because it does not offer a high return on investment across most fleet archetypes.

It's biggest advantage only manifests against large ships, and can be neutered if your opponent also brought strategic abilities.

It's most consistent advantage lay in the addition of dust fields. It is unique among yellow objectives in this aspect.

Comparatively, Jamming Barrier offers the advantage of not giving blowback against squadron heavy/whathaveyou builds.

Thus, to make it a difficult choice for your opponent, you need to have Strategic in your fleet, you need to not rely on big armaments, and you need to be able to effectively use those dust fields. Unless they have a Big Bad, they probably will choose Jamming Barrier over your other, more than likely, awesome objective choices. You will lose the utility of PIC against light carrier/squadron builds, but you will gain a huge advantage against those Big Bad lists and there will be little to no potential for blowback.

///End Article///

Well, that set a high bar.

Nice write up. I've yet to experiment with Strategic squadrons and this has definitely made me want to try them even more now

Nice strategy article.

(Obligatory whine that most objectives severely help squadron lists and hamper gunship lists)

Very nice, if the rest follow this standard we shall all gain a valuable resource.

Thanks for taking the time to write this up.

Not sure if relevant, but my most successful match using 5 raiders with screed APTs and ramming tactics has jamming barrier. It was against a fleet designed to engage at long range. With strategic I was able to get the barrier right up to his mc80's hull keeping the fragile raiders alive until they could get close enough to APT and ram... it was fun....

I would say say everything here matches up with my experiences.

Great read!

Solid points, I like it. I've only gotten to play one game with JB unfortunately, but on paper I'm on board.

Aye good post. For those times my fleet struggles against large ships.

And.

Ackbar. Who is almost immune to jamming barrier hilariously.

Thanks @Parkdaddy for putting in the time to write this.

Calling out @BiggsIRL to post these on his blog some-wheres.

If not if will be lost to the Forum Void...

This is so well organized and well done. Great job @Parkdaddy

An excellent article!

Jimminy Cricket! I just realized that the barrier also works on squad v squad attacks.

not huge, but it would certainly affect tactics and positioning. Also squadron selection, as 3-die become just as effective as 4-die (w/o flight controllers)

What's a strategic squadron and how is that different than a regular squadron?

I'd love to see your pelta list you refer to, if you have it handy and don't mind posting it or PM'ing me

lovely writeup, I feel like some of it went over my head due to my inexperience.

I hate strategic squadrons. I don't like using them first, therefore half of the objectives are a no go to me

edit: But, awesome article.

2 hours ago, buckero0 said:

What's a strategic squadron and how is that different than a regular squadron?

A unit with strategic keyword. Lambda or VCX. Both available in the squadron II expansions.

On 4/14/2017 at 9:12 AM, buckero0 said:

What's a strategic squadron and how is that different than a regular squadron?

I'd love to see your pelta list you refer to, if you have it handy and don't mind posting it or PM'ing me

lovely writeup, I feel like some of it went over my head due to my inexperience.