Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums - Reply to Topic
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

Thread: Dumb Rules Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
01-13-07 03:08 AM
uberschveinen What I'm trying to get across, seemingly spectacularly unsuccessfully, is that the current Tank Shock rules are the best combination of simplicity and realism I have yet to see, out of all its suggested modifications and outright replacements.

And Twisted, I agree. It seems somewhat... odd... that wearing enourmously protective armour somehow makes what you're riding in tougher than usual.
01-05-07 01:24 AM
jigplums Tanks shock rules are crap, the fact u could possible avoid a tank knowing it was driving at you is besides the point. Maybe a mechanic in place that made it likely that a model would get away would therefore make more sense. However that doesn't mean tank shock rules are good as they stand.
01-05-07 12:37 AM
Anphicar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahaal
How did he rebuke himself? That whole post was about how adding such things would make it to complicated.
Im aware of that.

But the way he did so showed points that are very relevant to the "I might/might not see the tank coming at me" arguement that support the opposing view of "I might not see the tank comming at me."
01-04-07 11:23 PM
TwistedDarkness I don't like the "Open topped vehicles don't count as open topped anymore when crewed by Marines" rule.
01-02-07 12:38 AM
Tahaal How did he rebuke himself? That whole post was about how adding such things would make it to complicated.
01-02-07 12:34 AM
Anphicar
Quote:
Originally Posted by uberschveinen
That would just add unneccesary complexities to the game. Rolling for awareness, distractedness, hunger, skill, vision, and all that before you even fire your gun would make this game unplayable.
You kind of rebuked your own arguement.

These factors would ake the game more lengthy, possibly boring and dull, yet these are factors in reality.

I realize most things woud run the hell away from a tank, but say you are in some extremed, focused, stressful situation. You might not notice the tank until its a bit close when you hear the rumble and droning it mkes.
01-01-07 09:09 AM
Tahaal Oh, nice way to drop out of the argument.

What do I wish they had? at least 33% terrain, rather then the 25%. Makes using vehicles SO much easier 8)
01-01-07 08:25 AM
smiley -.-" whatever im not gonna bother with u
01-01-07 02:55 AM
uberschveinen That would just add unneccesary complexities to the game. Rolling for awareness, distractedness, hunger, skill, vision, and all that before you even fire your gun would make this game unplayable.
01-01-07 02:18 AM
smiley even when behind an unaware squad? trying to get stabbed by troops that dont know your there....
or getting stabbed by a tank
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome