I disagree. I think it is most pronounced at this time. The home field advantage just gets to strong. Having to call a TO and grill them on potential rule interactions so you can practice those interactions and then hope the quoted rules are going to really be the rules used and not reconsidered is ridicules.
Not really. Ive done it for tournaments ive run and its worked incredibly smoothly. Hell that was a doubles tournie so the number of questions was even higher than normal and by compiling them in an faq weve pnly had to answer them once.
This is a fairly aggressive stance to take. I think perhaps you need to calm down. Calling people dicks on the forum is absolutely not acceptable
I'm not "wanting to say" anything of the sort, I've specifically only talked about a general idea that I think this thread has shown exists. Hopefully you can pull back on the personal attacks and we can have a reasonable discussion.
My experience is that there aren't that many that will make too much of a difference for most common lists (such that it requires rewriting a list or practising something specific). But there's also just as many weird 'resolved' interactions that you need to check (for example I took an Iggy to a tournie with Capture and Protect, I checked beforehand that it would be played the way I expected it to be played; equally I'd check how the TO was playing G:Sync vs structures if I was taking an Uberfalls list in Looting and Sabotaging) as unresolved ones. I think 'how a meta builds tables' or 'player x likes tactic y' gives more homefield advantage than most of the weird rules interactions.
Ok good tip thanks but I meant if one group is playing intent and the other group isnt then the one group can ignore your aro.s and the other group can either suck it up or play elsewhere so not so gentlemanly after all right. Not trolling because I played it both ways and our whole meta is totally chill but what are we supposed to do? And no asking the TO does NOT help obviously.
Give me some rope to say something here @psychoticstorm and yes I will avoid personal abuse @Spleen wants us to believe hes not running psychoticstorm down *himself* but just saying theres a "general idea" that an known member of the N3 rules team isnt respected for his contribution and doesnt have an authoritative opinion. Well thats not my opinion and probably not what the vast majority of people in the forum and community think either. I think hes expressing the opinion of himself and a couple of friends because they want to disregard the awkward things Storm said earlier this year about moving minis. If im not correct he could come out and say what he means instead of saying what he doesnt mean. Ok no Im calling cry bully on this one because hes not being attacked and theres no evidence he wants a reasonable discussion. Hes denigrating a valued member of the community which is a "poor form" move :) and at the same time say its not his own opinion which "lacks dignity" :)
Moderation The previous warning is generic and not directed to anybody in particular, as are all public warnings please avoid personal attacks and avoid assuming what people think. /Moderation On the subject about myself I never perceived any such opinions, maybe because I skimmed through them maybe because I did not participate enouph in rules sub forum the last couple of years since I have to look the entire forum and the rules subforum is relatively free of conflict, if there is an ambient opinion I am afraid it is mistaken. On the actual subject please wait for updates, personally I do not think the magic thing is implementable, but a satisfactory solution will be reached. I hope this settles it. Please continue the discussion in a calm and civilised manner.
I'm not going to let you bully me into engaging in a conversation the way you want me to rather than the way I choose to myself. you continue to personally attack me by attributing a malicious intent I never expressed to my actions, just because you didn't call me names doesn't change that this is a direct personal attack. please stop.
Put your aros in positions they cant be ignored..... a sniper looking at an objective of down a major firelane typically has to be delt with regardless of "how you play" This argument leads me to believe that either you are playing with too mich terrain or you are fundamentally misunderstanding or misrepresenting the argument that you are alluding to. But without going into that detail as we have been asked not too i would really have to ask how under any circumstances your aros are ignored and 2 under the hypothesis you suggest would you be upset if your aros were dying instead. Because outside of very niche miniscule differences the active player will probably always be able to kill your aros through the use of overwhelming force from the correct angle. Id imagine that you arent actually thinking that any aro outside of a few rare ML links is enough to stop units like jotums, Grey aphmg cores or HI pain trains.....at least not reliably. Aro is about slowing down and attrition play
Blitzen AROs work pretty well to stop Jotums (permanently) and HI pain trains (Isolate and IMM2 the Link Leader, link breaks). I forget if Blitzens work on Grey APHMG Cores in this edition (they didn't in N2). Also, without getting into Intent, if you back away from the corner, it's much easier to see if your final position can only see one model. Yeah, you lose cover. It's worth the time saved in arguments. Or you use the Lean Out rule.
That they do (and yes em affects ariadna HI). Some of the time at least. Most of the time the active unit will win the f2f of course. But thats because the active player gets to choose almost every engagement. This is due to then being the one spendiing orders of course.
Of course, when I'm talking about a Blitzen ARO, I'm talking about a pair of Tanko lighting someone up with the link team bonus (and the third punctuating it with a ML)
Because I use the People You Ignore feature, I actually didn't understand why this was being said! Which tells me the feature works very well, and I want to recommend it to those who get triggered by my attitude, my humour and in particular, my interest in clarifying the rules. This is not a so-called 'safe space' and people here will disagee with you, and they will challenge your ideas about all kinds of things including how to play the game. This is a forum set aside by Corvus Belli for us to discuss their game and their rules, and I think it fair to say my OP is an unequivocally constructive proposal posted in more or less the right place. I Ignore the people who disturb my peace of mind with their posts, and I invite them to do likewise if I disturb theirs. [edit: this post has been split and reposted]
Honestly the passive aggresive continuation of an argument youve been told to not continue is more disrespectful of @psychoticstorm than anything anyone else has said in this thread by far wolf. Edit and for those unfortunate enough to have to whatch this stage show, no one has said the idea of more clarity and communication from CB is a bad thing.
Sure id rate them on par with MLs though. Of course the point i was making wasnt that these aros dont exist. But that they do and its more how you position and use them that determines their effectiveness than anything else. Even when you do have them your opponent alsways has the option to use a disposable LI that is only goi g to suffer minimally from bad dice.
I will admit I haven't voted yet, mostly because I'm still not sure where I stand on this. I don't think CB has the staff to do things like MtGOracle (that updates, what, every couple weeks?). But it would be good to get far more comprehensive FAQs more often. @Koni (all hail the banhammer!) has said that they are looking at options short of MtGOracle, and is pretty good about getting stuff done. As long as you don't keep pestering him with requests for status updates, he's not very big on giving a status report when there's nothing to report. I've mentioned this one before. There was a time I was sure I was going to have to shoot a boat full of idiots (civilians) because they were on a collision course with my sub. Worse, this was about 5-6 weeks after 9-11, so we were really damn jumpy. This big 35ft Weldcraft aluminum speedboat came around the end of an island and pointed straight at my sub while we were on the surface and in a place where we couldn't dive. They were way off, something over 15,000 yards. But those big Weldcraft can cover 500 yards a minute or more (big engines), and we were doing about another 200 yards a minute towards them. If they got all the way to "I need to yell at you" range, they were going to go from "I need to yell at you" range to "I need to shoot you" range in about 30 seconds. I was standing on top of the sail with my rifle braced against a periscope, and I told the Officer of the Deck that he'd better be on his way down and covering his ears if I yelled "DOWN!" Our Torpedoman had a 40mm grenade launcher, and was standing forward of the sail (which is deadly-dangerous while the boat is in motion, good chance of being swept off the boat by a wave) If either one of us fired our weapons, we were going to get court-martialed. No argument. Thankfully, the Coast Guard rigid-hull inflatable boat (RHIB) went flying past us about the time those idjit sillyvilians were 10,000yards away, and went flying by so fast that I'm pretty sure the only thing in the water was the bottom ends of the 3x 225hp outboard engines. The Coasties then had a long, pointed conversation with the idjits, saving me from a court-martial. I'm relatively sure I would have been acquitted, mind you. But I still would have been tried. Who the heck is going to waste limited-ammo Blitzens on an LI? I'll still send the ML round his direction, but I'd rather save my Blitzens for HI or TAGs.
Depends on the range bands....the ml doesnt have the bltizen either.... But hey if my tanko haris was being attacked by a HMG fusilier link in the HMGs range bands id use the Blitzen if i had too. None of this is really the point though...
