tneva, can you honestly claim that with the proposed change your army would not have been whopped as it was? You charged your main SC formation into reach of 3-4 Land Speeder formations all coming from different directions so it was just bad call, like by Hena in next match. You just get irritated because of the extra punch caused by the rules; you might have gotten say 4-6 extra units to range without that existing rule, possibly dropping one (1) land speeder more, still causing your loss.

Then you proceed rolling 1 for all activations, which of course was the main downfall from here.

I'm getting a bit irritated on those insults you throw out while your own strategy/tactic just sucked - you practically surrendered when you saw my 35 Land Speeders (which, while considered cheese by many parties, would have been gladly fought by those Speed Freaks and DE). So my strategy (army composition, deployment and major moves) and tactic (pincer and clipping) was just superior.
Your defeat was just more swift with those rules.

And I have btw now provided 2. One which is bullet proof since it's just current except with this abuse removed. Hell simply removing premeasuring which is unneccessary crutch to begin with would be 95% enough for it.

_________________
-Vaaish

Tneva:  No one has shown you disrespect.  They've attempted to respond to your points with detailed posts.

You're not providing the same courtesy.  You're trolling and being dismissive and insulting.

_________________
Neal

So the answers are a free counter-charge that is not free, and removing pre-measuring (which can be done anyway during the 5 min warm-up).

By a 'free' counter-charge, I presume you mean that the defender may move in any direction provided the units do not end up outside 15cm from the attacker? An interesting idea that perhaps can be developed - but it also has flaws, because this would require those units outside the engagement to charge towards it, which the attacker could still exploit. And what of the supports? The biggest gripe is that supports cannot be hurt - how would you fix that?

Can you also explain why you think the attacker starts with a +2 advantage, as this is not part of the rules? I presume you mean that the attacker has carefully planned and manoeuvered his forces to give him these kind of advantages (Inspiring, numbers, BMs etc), while you have failed to counter them through bad luck or misjudgement.

Finally, I would caution against calling everyone a "Win At All Cost kid" if you want to play any game with anyone else.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Except attacker dictates everything about assault. You CAN'T get favourable situation unless attacker CHOOSES to give it to you.

Attacker always has situation to his advantage in assault. If he didn't have he wouldn't launch it! Unless of course he's already losing game and requires miracle to win but that's least likely scenario.

And loaded transports are death sentence. a) he will simply fire AT weapons there which, since we are talking infantry company here, will mean it only needs around 3 hits to hit all chimeras that are likely there b) he can simply fly fighter top of chimera he wants to blow and all hits start from there.

Transports are only good to transport stuff around on double orders. Only idiot leaves stuff inside there since they are easy to take out.

And you can only counter charge toward what attacker chooses you counter charge. Attacker is the one deciding everything in assault. They have enough advantages that if we would translate this to line up and everything fights they would start with +5-6 minimum for assault resolution. Defenders need tons of luck to win assault anyway. These unneeded illogical rules aren't needed to give attackers advantage.

Also they work from wrong merit. This is EPIC! This should be about LARGE SCALE warfare. Large scale warfare should be about BIG PICTURE! Not about micromanaging position of individual units to 1mm accuracy which will then have huge effects. That's more for skirmish sized games. For epic scaled battles rules should emphasis BIG PICTURE where positions of individual units aren't going to have killer effects.

But epic is just skirmish game with 6mm models.

_________________
www.tneva.net

It's in defenders best interest to get defending units to engagement. Or stay out if they already started out. Only difference to what is now is that another formation(or even lone bike which isn't there for supporting but just to draw them away) doesn't forbid you from getting units in range. If units wouldn't be in range and wouldn't want to move in range they wouldn't have to move. Note that requirement was that if they are in engagement range they couldn't move out of it. Apart from that they can move at will.

And +2 comes from the fact defender will always have BM's(unless attacker is plain idiot) while attacker rarely has them(again unless attacker is plain idiot). +1 from enemy having BM's and +1 from enemy having more BM's.

Add to that every other advantage they have and if you would just line formations so that both sides would get optimum attack rolls for all of their and convert the attackers benefits to plain numbers that would result effectively to ATLEAST +5-6 for attacker. That's how much advantages they have already. They don't need more advantages by silly illogical broken rules. As it is even if attacker doesn't exploit rules but gives defenders chance to fight back they are still virtually quaranteed to win barring horrible luck.

And I call WAAC kids WAAC kids if I want. Since I'm not playing any epic tournaments and therefore chances of playing epic is nearly 0%(barring move to 2 cities where I know for sure there are non-WAAC epic players) doesn't matter. I won't play against them ANYWAY. I have better things to do in my life than waste time playing against WAAC players. One game against them ruins enjoyable experience of 10 games against non-WAAC player.

As it was I would have been better off not attending tournament on sunday since first up I ran into WAAC player. Bleh.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Regards to the part b) take a look at the FAQ's

Whoever now uses aircraft sniping is considered to be a WAAC player.

Section 4.2: Aircraft
Q: Due to the extremely flexible
nature of the aircraft rules it is
possible for an aircraft to end its move
in the middle of an enemy formation,
in order to ensure that a specific
target is allocated hits before other
models. Is this legal?
A: This tactic is sometimes referred to as
‘Aircraft Sniping’ and although not against
the letter of the rules it is against their
intent. Because of this it’s a tactic that
players should avoid if they want to play
the game in the right spirit. Instead of a
detailed (and rather complex) rule to get
round the problem, we recommend that if
an aircraft ends its move within an enemy
formation then any fire is treated as coming
from the direction of approach rather than
its final position.

Well then I suggest you stop posting here and go play with the few people who are apparently prepared to put up with your tantrums.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

And since epic is dominated by WAAC players I expect to have this to be used against me in tournaments. So that chimera would be toast.

And hey it's just as fair as this counter charge move. If you have no problems with this counter charge move why would you have problems with this? I can think up number of equally "good" explanations why it's perfectly logical and realistic.

If you have no problems with the counter charge rule you cannot with any high moral sense claim to have problem with this rule either. Both are just as valid.

_________________
www.tneva.net

While rpr sometimes makes really effective lists, he has been always a gentleman player. And he gives good, exciting games too. I personally haven't seen anyone use aircraft sniping, ever!!!

_________________
Rats Keep Running...

Dark Eldar Dracon

What I cannot understand Tneva is that you claim not to like a rule as it goes against realism but then do this in a game.

Turn 3 I actually won strategy roll so infantry company moved next to rallied terminators and baneblade engaged them. Would have been satisfied for breaking them but actually wiped 'em out!

I suppose it's because I'm an evil WAAC player and he had a moral imperative to use my evil techniques against me

Also did I mention evil? Evil evil evil. Just rolls off the tongue.

Where the only difference is your opponent in the 1st game limited your troops fire back with good positioning but you had an infantry company in support that couldn't be targeted by the Terminators.

Why is it yours is good tactics but the other is WAAC !

_________________
www.tneva.net

You doubled your infantry company into support range so I doubt you could have made it to the assault. Let's not get carried away with the shining knight routine here.

Supporting fire is hardly abusing it. I didn't use infantry company to prevent terminators from participiating in the assault eventhough I could have if I had wanted to. Sure I would have had only 1 terminator in range but that's all I could hope to kill anyway so who cares? I wasn't planning to wipe them with casualties.