Quote:
unfortunately the EpicUK group have long made their feelings clear about this forum (just read Matt Otter's post in this very thread, for example, to see a negative attitude expressed)
I'm sorry but I don't see any negativity in the post towards these Boards. Just going through my post:
Quote:
And I suppose you’re talking from experience ... how many tournaments have you been to?
Okay it could of been worded a little better but it was a direct question to a comment made about tournaments bring out the worst in people ... I wanted to know how many tournaments that person has been to. This was so I could identify how much experience the guy has, of tournaments, to back up this statement. I’ve been to over 120 tournaments, in many different systems, in 3 different countries and I feel this guy does not have enough relevant experience to back this statement up.
Quote:
I think 'The_Real_Chris' raised a good point; why should a base of Grots be able to claim an objective when a Thunderhawk / Vampire Raider can't ... THAT doesn't make any sense.
I then said TRC made a good point
Quote:
Those people complaining about aircraft landing to contest objectives / they shall not pass ... have you ever thought about changing the way you play to deal with the threat??? Aircraft on the ground are the easiest things to kill; for example:
A vampire raider lands to contest an objective
All you have to do is move a formation within 15cm of the Vampire and place a blast marker; next get another formation to shoot at it ... 2 Blast Markers break it and, because it's within 15cm of an enemy (and cannot move) it is destroyed automatically. You don’t even have to roll any dice apart from activations.
I then asked people if they had changed the way they played to meet the threat AND gave a very good example to combat it ... I hardly think this is negative. Actually to me (thought I did write it) it sounds positive as it gives an explanation to deal with the threat.
Quote:
Now this is just an example; I'm sure people on this board will tear this example to pieces saying "... what if you haven't got two formations spare..." "... What if they play this stunt after all my formations have activated..."
I would say simply, you've been out played by a better player
Again not negative at these boards (though I can see how people could read it incorrectly); if you haven't got the activations to deal with your opponents tactics, or your opponent has targeted your formations that could potentially disallow him from landing a flyer to contest an objective then your opponent should be congratulated on playing better than you, and quite rightly deserved to win. Saying that the tactic is cheesy or shouldn't be allowed, doesn't mean that your opponent doesn't deserve the right to win the game and be congratulated.