Why wouldn't they have support fire? Just because they are drawing defenders away doesn't mean they can't provide supporting fire. So that's 10 attacks giving you easily +3-4 to dice roll which will win the assault. Obviously they have prepared them to have BM's. They don't need good hitting chances so they could have AA guns that hit on 10+ and BM would still be placed.

That's what those land speeders were doing. Toasting formation after formation. Only reason they never got around toasting more was that after game was in bags already my army refused to move toward objectives(which might have delayed loss 'till turn 4) which meant there was unusually long distance between marines and my army. If I had passed any activation rolls I would have lost even more formations(russ company being prime candinate since as BTS and only formation that could reach bliz and dent his BTS goal, warhounds, would be driving fast toward bliz objective and trying to knock down warhounds).

As it was my army was doing only way to defend against that abuse and that is sitting in my half of board. Of course it's quaranteed victory to opponent but atleast some units of the army will survive. Having BTS to survive against that abuse is victory in itself.

_________________
www.tneva.net

I think you may have misunderstood the assault rules.

You can only shoot at directly engaged models - that is units you have los to and are able to fight the attacking formation. All those unit that are out of position ans their counter charge takes away from the combat cannot be used as targets for supporting fire as they cannot shoot the attackers. To be crystal clear you only get supporting fire at defending units that can shoot the attackers.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

So what? Thanks to stupid premeasuring he can position models to perfection. Might take long time but no rule requires him to complete movement quickly.

Didn't stop him from both denying me attacks AND supporting fire.

It's just matter of position and since attacker dictates who will fight and there's that stupid premeasuring rule(epic would be 10x better without it or atleast with lot more restricted premeasuring) it's no problem whatsoever.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Now we are getting really silly. The enemy has free run of the board clearly and has managed with the first formation to run up and blast marker you and further more put them into a position whereby they are in range of any units involved in the subsequent assault but are also closer to the enemy and at a angle to ensure that countercharges don't take enemy units towards the attackers. I'm sorry but what formations do your defensive units use? Here we tend towards lines or clumps, deploying in a u shape is quite rare.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Tight group. Almost shoulder to shoulder since I didn't have to worry about blast templates. Commander and commisar stands around middle.

How hard it is to understand that with speed of land speeders and premeasuring attacker can position them perfectly? He doesn't need qazillion targets for his FF attacks. 3 minimum, 5 is slight overkill. That's all he needs. And BM's is easy as even one AA10+ weapon on his formation does that. How many land speeder formations are out there that don't have ANY weapons?

The rule is just broken, silly and illogical and anyone who even tries to defend it is just plain rule lawyer and WAAC(win at all cost) player. They can try to claim they aren't but action speaks louder than words.

Thank god I don't have to face any more of these stupid WAAC epic players.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Ok tneva82, you seem determined to be miserable and un-cooperative for some reason. It sounds as though you have had a poor experience as the result of a number of factors that came together in one game. Rpr has already suggested that he was actually trying to point out an existing problem, which seems to have compounded things. I might add that in UK tournaments, players usually sort out minor problems such as this after a quick discussion. On rare occasions the umpire has to make a decision that is usually accepted without further discussion - though some situations get posted to sort out the ramifications.

As others will tell you, I regularly throw lower than average dice, fail to activate, lose engagements etc. However, I probably lose more games as a result of 'superior generalship'. You need to know the rules in order to play any game, and to make the best of any given situation, and this is just as true for Epic - in short you need to 'play to your best advantage'. If you ever play another game of Epic (which seems unlikely under the circumstances), please try to learn the rules, understand the capabilities of each army, understand the personality of your opponent, make best use of the terrain and position formations and units with care - in short, I would recommend you read and apply the lessons from Sun Tzu's "Art of War".

Oh, and above all, try to make your opponent's experience as much fun as possible, so he will want to play you again and hopefully you can learn from him (and others), and so improve your own abilities. Wargaming should emphasise the "game" and not be a "war".

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

He says. Just one problem. I don't believe it. You can point out problems without abusing them.

And if winning games require abusing rules like these counter charge rules I rather lose. I prefer to lose by playing with spirit of rules than win at all cost by abusing loop holes. Broken abusable rules like these should have no place in rules but obviously epic is game of WAAC players and rule abusers where abusing loop holes takes precedence over superior tactics and strategy. If it wasn't these things would have been fixed LOOOONG time ago. 4 years and we still have messed up rules and unbalanced lists. Why? Because folks responsible for them aren't even trying of getting things right. Just boosting their armies power so they can win more easily.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Because folks responsible for them aren't even trying of getting things right. Just boosting their armies power so they can win more easily.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Yes, of course, what ever...  
I guess you are aware that you act like a 12 year old child whose lollipop was just stolen? I guess it is just your style (albeit a very stange one)of debating a problem with the rules so that we find a solution to this problem. But i assure you that accusing the whole Epic community will not help.

_________________
www.tneva.net

That might be an intention, but as stated, I think it fights against "fair common sense" of many - clearly if we charge toward certain enemy we should be able to shoot at them? As epic rules are as complex as they are with forgotten rules always popping up, they should not include such a hidden bombs which, as proved, feel plain WRONG for at least some players..

Just my opinion. This discussion is drifting to conclusion that "well it is a good rule, live with it", so I'm out.. sorry for tneva, again.

tneva82, your attitide is becoming increasingly unhelpfull. So, rather than ranting, what is your solution to the 'problem' that you see here?

Try listing each of the elements that you perceive as 'broken' and then present your solutions to them rather than just shouting that the world is 'unfair'.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Why, it seems about as unhelpful as it was at the start to me.

That's hardly rocket science. Howabout fix the god damn illogical broken rules? Not that hard if you want. I have played such epic rules for 4-5 years(was epicA released 2004 or 2005?). If there's will to fix them then they would have been fixed long time ago-

Howabout try a test. Ask how people who don't know about rules of epic would do it. I bet they wouldn't counter charge so that units wouldn't be able to participiate in assault. Why? Because it's illogical with no basis to realism!

Good logical rules are ones you can instinctively play because they make sense. These don't and top of that they are way too powerfull.

But to each to his own. Epic players want non-clear illogical rules riddled with stuff they can abuse. I don't. Luckily chances of me playing another game of epic is nearly 0% so I don't care anymore. Enjoy your broken illogical rules. I play games where rules are clear and logical and where player base isn't filled with WAAC kids.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Numerous people have already said that there is a real basis for pinning defender reserves. I'm sure the RL defending commanders felt cheated and frustrated when an attacker did it to them every time. What could convince you on this point?