Stick a fork in the GT's, they're done.

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Remember when I pointed out that the cost of GT's had fallen cuz they
couldn't finagle the better room rate? Remember when I pointed out the
huge lack of sales at the last round of GTs? How they used to sell out
in hours, but now took weeks to sell out, if they even sold out at all?

Well, I guess it all comes to a head because all GT's are now postponed
until after Games Day. Yup that's right, there is NO tourney schedule
for 2005. Woah... Basically they may integrate the GT's into Games Day,
but they're already plugging Games Day pretty hard...

The decline in GT quality has been noted for some time. Basically
they're hella understaffed and kids are being allowed in, which pissed
off older gamers to no extent. Imagine forking over $89-$250 and
playing against an eight-year old. GW's attitude was, "If they're old
enough to pay, they're old enough to play." Which is true enough, I
suppose, but it's not really what older gamers were looking for.

--Chris

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Chris Valera wrote:
> Remember when I pointed out that the cost of GT's had fallen cuz they
> couldn't finagle the better room rate? Remember when I pointed out the
> huge lack of sales at the last round of GTs? How they used to sell out
> in hours, but now took weeks to sell out, if they even sold out at all?

I think it's more the point that the last few GTs have had shitty
support and shitty coverage, along with significant grousing from the
attendees. GW pulled back on bonuses (bitz sales, etc.), so there's no
interest.

> Well, I guess it all comes to a head because all GT's are now postponed
> until after Games Day. Yup that's right, there is NO tourney schedule
> for 2005. Woah... Basically they may integrate the GT's into Games Day,
> but they're already plugging Games Day pretty hard...

I think it's more that GW has totally screwed up the GTs.

> The decline in GT quality has been noted for some time.

GW has continuously experimented to see what they could do to reduce the
value to the gamer but cutting bonuses and sales and such. They've cut
too much.

> Basically they're hella understaffed

That is because GW is trying to make their standard (i.e. excessive)
profit on GTs, rather than simply running them at cost.

> and kids are being allowed in, which pissed off older gamers to no
> extent. Imagine forking over $89-$250 and playing against an
> eight-year old. GW's attitude was, "If they're old enough to pay,
> they're old enough to play." Which is true enough, I
> suppose, but it's not really what older gamers were looking for.

Kids aren't a problem per se, as long as they know their rules and are
decent sports...

Personally, I don't think I'm interested in gaming in a GT any more.
The recent reports have really turned me off the idea.

--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwang...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

What's amazing is that some people RT, Maka, Qrab, Hwang etc. would
actually show up to the GT's not to play, but to score the mad discount
on bitz. They're slitting their own throat here, seriously.

Kids are a problem when it brings down the overall quality of the
tourney. The GT used to be a high profile event. Now...

--Chris

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Chris Valera wrote:
> The decline in GT quality has been noted for some time. Basically
> they're hella understaffed and kids are being allowed in, which pissed
> off older gamers to no extent. Imagine forking over $89-$250 and
> playing against an eight-year old. GW's attitude was, "If they're old
> enough to pay, they're old enough to play." Which is true enough, I
> suppose, but it's not really what older gamers were looking for.

It wouldn't be so bad playing against an eigh year old if he was mature
enough, knew the rules and had an army who's paint job wasn't out of a
Krylon can.

The last GT I went to in Atlanta I prepped for months, painted my @$$
off to the last minute and ended up facing some 20-something (who acted
about eight) that didn't know the rules well at all and had a Krylon
gloss-black painted Templar army.

Between that and the Drop-Pod fiasco that was reported in the Seattle
GT, I'll be holding off for a while even if they DO have another GT here.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 05:42:49 -0500, Hive Tyrant
<richbusby@hatespam.comcast.net> wrote:

>Between that and the Drop-Pod fiasco that was reported in the Seattle
>GT, I'll be holding off for a while even if they DO have another GT here.

The drop pod fiasco, as I understand it, wasn't that big of a deal.
The biggest problem is that several people have not yet learned how to
deal with drop pods, and some Marine players who knew how to use them
did a good job.

There were some major problems in the cheating, sportsmanship, and
overall quality areas that haven't been as pronounced in the past, and
I think that's where the problems are coming in.
-Erik

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Hive Tyrant" <richbusby@hatespam.comcast.net> escreveu na mensagem
news:tv6dnQDpu7C6wqTfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> Between that and the Drop-Pod fiasco that was reported in the Seattle GT,
> I'll be holding off for a while even if they DO have another GT here.

?!?!? Huh?!

Sorry, could you tell me what fiasco was that?...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

First, I was *not* at the GT. I read about it later.

My impressions from these reports are:

A local gaming group attended, their 40k players *all* using DP lists.

Their purpose for this was not publicly stated, but in retrospect . . .


The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.

These had, in many cases, somewhat oversize bases attached.

This 'tactical modeling' was cleverly combined with two rules:

* Reduced Scatter for Pod Placement and

* May Not Move Within 1in of Enemy.

Folks are okay with teaching GW a lesson about play-testing GT rules.

But apparently, no one wants to be used as a teaching aid . . .

Two other Seattle GT reports of interest:

1. A pail of water to detect weighted dice. Positive results achieved.

2. Disgusted players leaving the hallowed precincts of the GT early!

#1 reason - Judges lax on enforcing the un(der)painted armies rule.


Playa

--

"To cheat oneself out of love is the most terrible deception; it is an
eternal loss for which there is no reparation, either in time or in
eternity"
- Soren Kierkegaard

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Hmmm . . . not showing quoted text, for some reason.

[Copy/pastes]

Thanks for the clarification

+ No more than further rumor, actually. *

GW can't really bitch about the 'oversized' bases

+ It wasn't GW that was doing the 'bitching'. +

'ok to use larger, but not smaller bases'

+ I understood that to mean Citadel bases, but . . . +

good placement when landing?

+ If 'good' = <3in of each other in a picket across the board. +

disallowing the use of DP...or 'mandating' that all the pods be
'Forgeworld'

+ Or that bases be no larger than a standard ordnance pieplate? +

Do all unweighted dice float?

+ Weighted dice sink unnaturally straight down, with no tumbling. +

What's sad is that people would even bother to show up to a gaming
event with loaded dice.

+ Wargames are easy. People are difficult. +

I wonder how many folks got (correctly) dinged for having weighted
dice?

+ One fellow reported a 'Bustee' claiming his dice were borrowed. +

I see this as an example of where GW's elitist "The GW Hobby"
mindset has turned around and bitten them in the ass.

+ I may be something of an elitist myself, then.

In friendly games, we've all played armies of ninja commandoes
(black primer).

Various armies painted in 'arctic camo'
(white primer).

And how many post-Heresy pewter SM Chapters can there be
(Silver Wolves, Steel Angels, etc)?

True story:

I know a SM player who's spray-painted all his plastics chromium.

To match his unpainted metals, of course. +

War Machine becomes vastly more appealing to someone who wants to start
playing right away rather than 'paint for eight months - then play'.

+ This assumes a player without a collected force to begin with.

To clarify my exception to unpainted armies - it's circumstantial:

In games that feature the odd 'Orbital Popcorn Barrage' - no worries.

But, in an official sanctioned tournament?

It's bad form to bring an army/ list you haven't worked hard to craft.

It shows potential opponents you feel they're not worth the effort. +


Playa

--

"They cannot take away our self-respect if we do not give it to them."
- Mahatma Gandhi

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On 20 Mar 2005 12:50:56 -0800, "Playa" <hurlgen40k@aol.com> wrote:

>good placement when landing?
>+ If 'good' = <3in of each other in a picket across the board. +

I don't see a big problem with this, I can imagine Space Marine
commanders planning such a drop.
-Erik

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

In article <1111342579.139061.252200@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
Playa, hurlgen40k@aol.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
> First, I was *not* at the GT. I read about it later.
>
> My impressions from these reports are:
>
> A local gaming group attended, their 40k players *all* using DP lists.
>
> Their purpose for this was not publicly stated, but in retrospect . . .
>
>
> The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>
> These had, in many cases, somewhat oversize bases attached.
>
> This 'tactical modeling' was cleverly combined with two rules:
>
> * Reduced Scatter for Pod Placement and
>
> * May Not Move Within 1 inch of Enemy.
>
> Folks are okay with teaching GW a lesson about play-testing GT rules.
>
> But apparently, no one wants to be used as a teaching aid . . .

Thanks for the clarification on this, I was wondering too. The
funny part is GW can't really bitch about the 'oversized' bases since GW
(cluelessly) included the bit about 'ok to use larger, but not smaller
bases' in the 40K 4th Ed core rules. I take it they (the DP army
players) used the oversized bases to help ensure good placement when
landing? (I'm not 100% certain of how the above items combined to
abusive levels.) About all I can see on this one is either GW
disallowing the use of DP armies in GT/RTT play or 'mandating' that all
the pods be 'Forgeworld' (a.k.a. $$$ GW) only.



>
> Two other Seattle GT reports of interest:
>
> 1. A pail of water to detect weighted dice. Positive results achieved.
>
Wow - that's both funny and sad. Do all unweighted dice float?
(I've never really tested dice, and I don't have any weighted dice to
test if they sink.) I would think that at least some of the good 'high
impact' (i.e. high density) dice would sink even if they weren't
weighted? What's sad is that people would even bother to show up to a
gaming event with loaded dice. If you can't play based on your own
skill and accept that you're not the next 'Sun Tzu' and going to win
every battle, why even play? I can understanding going for say, the
painting, etc even if one is an extremely poor strategist - but cheating
just to get a trophy? What a hollow victory that would be. It's sort
of like the guy who 'won' one of the Young Blood painting competitions,
until it was discovered that he bought the winning mini from someone
else and entered it as his own. How humiliating would that be to get
caught publicly? Ouchy. Ah well, I wonder how many folks got
(correctly) dinged for having weighted dice?

> 2. Disgusted players leaving the hallowed precincts of the GT early!
>
> #1 reason - Judges lax on enforcing the un(der)painted armies rule.

I see this as an example of where GW's elitist "The GW Hobby"
mindset has turned around and bitten them in the ass. The folks behind
Iron Kingdoms / War Machine have no qualms with paying customers /
gamers using unpainted minis in their events. They don't care if you
bought your army two hours before the tournament and finished putting it
together 5 minutes before the event starts. They apparently figure if
you bought the minis and want to play - game on! This more relaxed
approach seems to be a lot more appealing to new and casual gamers
compaired to GW's rabid "must be GW only, painted using GW paints,
assembled using official GW glue, flocked with GW flock, placed only on
official GW bases, and then it's only OK if Fat Bloke says so" approach.
Between the painting requirements and the lower cost requirements,
jumping into something like War Machine becomes vastly more appealing to
someone who wants to start playing right away rather than 'paint for
eight months - then play'.

Myrmidon

--
#1582. I think they call it Warhammer "40K" because that is how
much you are going to have to make per year in order to play.

- Eric Noland

# 1082. Pound for pound I can buy cocaine cheaper than
raise a Warhammer army

- Roy Cox

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gwprice/

****

RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org

Or...

http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:57:58 GMT, Myrmidon <ImNot@home.com> wrote:

>> But apparently, no one wants to be used as a teaching aid . . .
>
> Thanks for the clarification on this, I was wondering too. The
>funny part is GW can't really bitch about the 'oversized' bases since GW
>(cluelessly) included the bit about 'ok to use larger, but not smaller
>bases' in the 40K 4th Ed core rules. I take it they (the DP army
>players) used the oversized bases to help ensure good placement when
>landing? (I'm not 100% certain of how the above items combined to
>abusive levels.) About all I can see on this one is either GW
>disallowing the use of DP armies in GT/RTT play or 'mandating' that all
>the pods be 'Forgeworld' (a.k.a. $$$ GW) only.

I spotted at least two DP armies at the RTT at Games Day, and both
used the DPs you can buy off of eBay. No big deal was made about
them, though they didn't have bases and weren't meeting with the best
of success.

>> 1. A pail of water to detect weighted dice. Positive results achieved.
>>
> Wow - that's both funny and sad. Do all unweighted dice float?
>(I've never really tested dice, and I don't have any weighted dice to
>test if they sink.) I would think that at least some of the good 'high
>impact' (i.e. high density) dice would sink even if they weren't
>weighted?

Dice sink relatively slowly in water, and with the slowed fall
weighted dice will rotate almost 100% of the time to have the cheating
facing showing. Check out DakkaDakka, they had a lot of discussion
about how this works.
-Erik

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>> The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>
> This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
> proxy) models, and call the referee.
>

Illegal? LOL

Rob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Myrmidon" <ImNot@home.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ca793614fc10d7f98a4cc@news-server.woh.rr.com...
>> Two other Seattle GT reports of interest:
>>
>> 1. A pail of water to detect weighted dice. Positive results achieved.
>>
> Wow - that's both funny and sad. Do all unweighted dice float?
> (I've never really tested dice, and I don't have any weighted dice to
> test if they sink.) I would think that at least some of the good 'high
> impact' (i.e. high density) dice would sink even if they weren't
> weighted?

I imagine it wouldn't matter if the die sinks or floats. If it sinks it'll
always land at the bottom of the pail weighted side down. If it floats
it'll bob weighted side down.


--

-smithdoerr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Robert Williams wrote:
>>>The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>>
>>This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
>>proxy) models, and call the referee.
>
> Illegal? LOL

IIRC, standard GT rules say the models must be GW Citadel / FW /
Marauder / .... Scratchbuilds don't contain GW content, so aren't even
capable of being called conversions.

--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwang...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

It was a cold day in September when Playa entered the world pub known as
rec.games.miniatures.warhammer and said...

> Do all unweighted dice float?
>
> + Weighted dice sink unnaturally straight down, with no tumbling. +
>
> What's sad is that people would even bother to show up to a gaming
> event with loaded dice.
>
>
What's even sadder is that people would show up with buckets of water to
test them with...
--
Jim M

"Look alive. Here comes a buzzard." -- Walt Kelly (Pogo)
"The only game I like to play is Old Maid - provided she's not too old." --
Groucho Marx

http://jimac.tripod.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
news:xvt%d.9111$wL6.6664@trnddc03...
> Robert Williams wrote:
>>>>The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>>>
>>>This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
>>>proxy) models, and call the referee.
>>
>> Illegal? LOL
>
> IIRC, standard GT rules say the models must be GW Citadel / FW / Marauder
> / .... Scratchbuilds don't contain GW content, so aren't even capable of
> being called conversions.

OK. I thought the players used converted rhinos though?

Rob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Robert Williams" <mail@rscc.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d1n3he$bn0$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
> news:xvt%d.9111$wL6.6664@trnddc03...
>> Robert Williams wrote:
>>>>>The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>>>>
>>>>This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
>>>>proxy) models, and call the referee.
>>>
>>> Illegal? LOL
>>
>> IIRC, standard GT rules say the models must be GW Citadel / FW / Marauder
>> / .... Scratchbuilds don't contain GW content, so aren't even capable of
>> being called conversions.
>
> OK. I thought the players used converted rhinos though?
>
No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star Wars
escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking cardboard
fins.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Craig Little" <craig.little@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:AcGdnb0okNSjg6LfRVn-oA@comcast.com...
>
> "Robert Williams" <mail@rscc.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:d1n3he$bn0$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>> "John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
>> news:xvt%d.9111$wL6.6664@trnddc03...
>>> Robert Williams wrote:
>>>>>>The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
>>>>>proxy) models, and call the referee.
>>>>
>>>> Illegal? LOL
>>>
>>> IIRC, standard GT rules say the models must be GW Citadel / FW /
>>> Marauder / .... Scratchbuilds don't contain GW content, so aren't even
>>> capable of being called conversions.
>>
>> OK. I thought the players used converted rhinos though?
>>
> No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star Wars
> escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking
> cardboard fins.

I see.

Rob


>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

In article <AcGdnb0okNSjg6LfRVn-oA@comcast.com>, Craig Little,
craig.little@gmail.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
>
> "Robert Williams" <mail@rscc.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:d1n3he$bn0$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > "John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
> > news:xvt%d.9111$wL6.6664@trnddc03...
> >> Robert Williams wrote:
> >>>>>The fiasco? Most of their pods were scratch-built.
> >>>>
> >>>>This is a problem. I'd force the player not to field illegal (copy or
> >>>>proxy) models, and call the referee.
> >>>
> >>> Illegal? LOL
> >>
> >> IIRC, standard GT rules say the models must be GW Citadel / FW / Marauder
> >> / .... Scratchbuilds don't contain GW content, so aren't even capable of
> >> being called conversions.
> >
> > OK. I thought the players used converted rhinos though?
> >
> No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star Wars
> escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking cardboard
> fins.

Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously
piss off someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall (for
all practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map you
wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way. I used to
drop walls of smoke in Old Epic and it was a serious advantage.

Myrmidon

--
#1582. I think they call it Warhammer "40K" because that is how
much you are going to have to make per year in order to play.

- Eric Noland

# 1082. Pound for pound I can buy cocaine cheaper than
raise a Warhammer army

- Roy Cox

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gwprice/

****

RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org

Or...

http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Myrmidon wrote:
> Craig Little,
> craig.little@gmail.com Varfed ...

>>No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star Wars
>>escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking cardboard
>>fins.
>
> Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously
> piss off someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall (for
> all practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map you
> wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way. I used to
> drop walls of smoke in Old Epic and it was a serious advantage.

All the more reason to force players to pay the $400 (or whatever) for
the "pleasure" of having the option to inflict this on the opponent.

--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwang...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
news:1YO%d.19340$oa6.8511@trnddc07...
> Myrmidon wrote:
>> Craig Little, craig.little@gmail.com Varfed ...
>
>>>No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star
>>>Wars escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking
>>>cardboard fins.
>>
>> Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously piss off
>> someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall (for all
>> practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map you
>> wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way. I used to
>> drop walls of smoke in Old Epic and it was a serious advantage.
>
> All the more reason to force players to pay the $400 (or whatever) for the
> "pleasure" of having the option to inflict this on the opponent.

So are drop pods now treated as transport vehicles that are immobile after
deep striking or something? (Don't have the new SM codex yet)


--

-smithdoerr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"smithdoerr" <askmeforname@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3aa5ueF65oqqlU1@individual.net...
>
> "John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
> news:1YO%d.19340$oa6.8511@trnddc07...
>> Myrmidon wrote:
>>> Craig Little, craig.little@gmail.com Varfed ...
>>
>>>>No, they were going too, but ran out of time, they used inverted Star
>>>>Wars escape pods from the action figure line, with honking LOS-blocking
>>>>cardboard fins.
>>>
>>> Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously piss off
>>> someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall (for all
>>> practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map you
>>> wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way. I used to
>>> drop walls of smoke in Old Epic and it was a serious advantage.
>>
>> All the more reason to force players to pay the $400 (or whatever) for
>> the "pleasure" of having the option to inflict this on the opponent.
>
> So are drop pods now treated as transport vehicles that are immobile after
> deep striking or something? (Don't have the new SM codex yet)
>
Roughly, yes.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Myrmidon wrote:
8<>8
> Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously
> piss off someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall
(for
> all practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map
you
> wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way.
8<>8

I haven't played vs a pod (or seeding) army yet.

It would interest me to see what they're like.

But, imagine you were a player with this attitude in Seattle:

You're all optimistic anticipation, when your opponent uncrates -

*Nine* dinner plate-based pods! How's your optimism, now?

You may think "Well, if I don't win, there's always next match."

Then you look across the room. You spot four of this guy's buds.

And, they're *all* unpacking drop pods . . .

If it had been only one player using this tactic?

Then, inaction on the part of the judges wouldn't be an issue.

Reportedly, the group sorted out rules exceptions with the judges.

So, more than the Five Amigos knew what was about to happen.

The Seahawk Stadium Drop Pod Massacree of 2005.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Myrmidon wrote:
8<>8
> Ah, I can see where this would have the potential to seriously
> piss off someone on the recieving end. You'd basically drop a wall
(for
> all practical LOS purposes) loaded with troops anywhere on the map
you
> wanted. Yeah, that is a huge advantage if used in that way.
8<>8

I haven't played vs a pod (or seeding) army yet.

It would interest me to see what they're like.

Now, imagine you were a player with this attitude in Seattle:

You're all optimistic anticipation, when your opponent uncrates -

*Nine* dinner plate-based pods!

You may think "Well, if I don't win, there's always next match."

Then, looking across the room, you notice four other players.

They're setting-up, too. And they're *all* unpacking drop pods!

The kicker? The judges don't seem to notice anything amiss.

*That* is what will cause this event to be remembered as -

"The Great Seattle Drop Pod Massacree of 2005".


Playa

--

"We used to root for the Indians against the Cavalry, because
we didn't think it was fair in the history books that when the
Cavalry won it was a 'great victory', and when the Indians won
it was a 'massacre'."
- Dick Gregory

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On the 20 Mar 2005, John Hwang <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote:

<snip>

> bases may not be smaller than what they ship with (loophole - old Dreads
> didn't ship with bases)

What about the older terminators, which came with the same sized bases
as power armoured marines - i.e. all of my brother's Dark Angel
terminators and several of his Grey Knight ones?

--
Jades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm
The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web.

nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address!