| | | | Author | Message |
|---|
Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
|  Subject: Rules for Angry Bob  Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:12 pm | |
| Here is the offical ruling I was not allowed to use today: I believ I was not allowed to use this standard ability, because, this ability interfiered with your Col. Stark, in your army. Im sorry I have special abilitys. That is how the Red Blok is designed. And here it is:
http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=3212
Bob, this is what you wanted to do today with Col. Stark.. NOT ALLOWED unless stated otherwise.
This would not only NOT be allowed by the rules, but would and does give the UNA, a major illeagal advantage over any faction, if played this way.
http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=3794
Here is another ruling that does not allow terrain to be targeted by locked shot weapons,(col. stark) unless the mission specifically call for it. The mission "Seek and Destroy" Does not allow Targeted terrain with locked shot weapons.
To add to this, The Red Blok has Combat Engineers that are allowed to blow terrain in any game, if within 2.5cm of any rackham terrain. I was not allowed to use this everyday ability. The UNA has the same combat engineers as well.
http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=3215
If you would play your army like it should be played, you wouldnt have to worry about everybody elses special abilitys, because they can be countered when the UNA is played correctly!!
You have totally ruined my game for me today. And this isint the first time you have ruined my game with your terrible sportmanship in playing games.
Everything you tried to do today, and insisted that I was wrong in a loud and childish manner, is all right here in black and white. If I havent satisfied you, in answering any of your terrible abusive mis-interpratations of the rules, PLEASE LET ME KNOW,and I will continue to answer any of your questions.
Have good games in the future. 
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon. |
|   | | Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:30 am | |
| I would like to say, I did in fact, steer you wrong one time today, Your LanceLots may fire as a whole, when only one in a unit of one of more has LOS.
Its to bad you didnt want to split the fire up, meaning shoot with all your left handed weapons, and then your right handed weapons, when I recommended it. Im glad you didnt. You could have very well, caused a hell of alot more damage this way.
So much for that!!
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:12 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | Here is the offical ruling I was not allowed to use today: I believ I was not allowed to use this standard ability, because, this ability interfiered with your Col. Stark, in your army. Im sorry I have special abilitys. That is how the Red Blok is designed. And here it is:
http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=3212 |
I never said it wasn’t possible. I said it was cheesy and broken. A number of other people kept complaining that indirect is broken and cheesy. That is supposedly going to be fixed. Since it screws me more than anybody else it would be nice to get something back.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=3215 |
You said the ruling wasn’t recent. The game has been more or less dead in Cincinnati since before December. George very-unfortunately had to stop playing, John got busy, and where I showed up someplace to play no one else did or it was just Nick and I.
The reason I asked if the ruling was recent was because Rackham has a history of changing rules after the fact or getting weird rulings. Not because I didn’t believe you.
Up until then there was no ruling in the main book about this no-targeting terrain. They also provided an armor value and structure points for trench walls and containers. Finally lock-shot weapons can only target things with structure points.
1+1=2. Lock-shot can target terrain base on the main rulebook.
1+1=3. Lock-shot can’t target terrain. But Rackham couldn’t get that little detail in the main rulebook so it has to be changed in a forum because we don’t bother with regular FAQ’s like normal miniature companies.
A piece of advice. If you are going to bring up a rule “cite” the source. Preferably bring a print off because even just saying it is on the forums is iffy. Saying that the senario will tell when terrain can be destroyed when that logic isn’t in the main rulebook sounds like you are making up offical rules.
I for one stopped going to the Rackham forums. The people there tend to be full of themselves. A disturbing group of them attack people when there is gripe that isn’t sanctioned. Case in point the UNA not being a complete rulebook or up to date they get hostile. If it is indirect fire people can bitch all they want about it being broken.
The behavior over there is sickening. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:17 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | Everything you tried to do today, and insisted that I was wrong in a loud and childish manner |
Check your own six first. Then call it.
I volenteered to play by these optional indirrect rules knowing it was going to hurt me many more times than you. All because you weren't happy with the printed rules as they currently are.
So asking not to get screwed by a rule loophole of the Red Block is a very minor request.
It is all about the compramise. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:22 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | Its to bad you didnt want to split the fire up, meaning shoot with all your left handed weapons, and then your right handed weapons, when I recommended it. Im glad you didnt. You could have very well, caused a hell of alot more damage this way. |
It's not right to screw somebody if it really bugs them. Besides if I did roll three and three dice bad karhma would have resulted in two complete misses or a single small hit.
There isn't somthing right about punishing somebody for using infantry. Hense why the indirrect is probably going to be changed in the next book. |
| | | | Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:07 pm | |
| | Angry Bob wrote: | I volenteered to play by these optional indirrect rules knowing it was going to hurt me many more times than you. All because you weren't happy with the printed rules as they currently are.
So asking not to get screwed by a rule loophole of the Red Block is a very minor request.
It is all about the compramise. |
For your information, the Indirect Fire Rules, have been changed, and the way we played them, are the new offical way, they arent being printed in the second edition untill Operation Frotbite Comes out.
I was helping you, by not playing with the old Indirect Fire Rules. The Red Blok could have 3 grenade launchers in almost every unit, not to mention the mortar launchers. Not to mention all my chacters with hand guns with aeo weapons, with ACC. 1, and yes, this small hand weapon may shoot clear across the table, and nock down all infantry. Thats what you call broke.
Where do you get off saying the aeo Rules scrue your army? Your army is built all around direct fire. Locked Shot Weapons. Hard hitting weapons, not AOF
| Angry Bob wrote: | All because you weren't happy with the printed rules as they currently are.
|
Wrong!! Once again, they are offical.
| Angry Bob wrote: | | The game has been more or less dead in Cincinnati since before December. George very-unfortunately had to stop playing, John got busy |
Thats a funny coment. The game isint dead, its played every week. Just not at a store that dosent support Rackham product, YET.
| Angry Bob wrote: | | and where I showed up someplace to play no one else did |
I would soul search that for a moment.
| Angry Bob wrote: | | Up until then there was no ruling in the main book about this no-targeting terrain |
Page 97, from the ONLY AT-43 RULEBOOK EVER PUBLISHED.
And I quote" Terrain element may be destroyed using the sabotage ability" **WHICH I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO USE**
It then moves on to say, and I quote again,"However, when the mission allows it, some terrain elements may be destroyed by fighters weapon". Meaning ONLY if the mission specifically says, you are allowed to destroy terrain with either:
A. Locked Shot Weapons
B. Terrain with structure points
So far, NO AT-43 Missions allow you to desrtoy terrain, Because the UNA is the only Army with:
A. Locked Shot Weapons
B. Locked Shot Weapons
And you say your Massive and the most powerful army in the AT-43 Universe at this point, is being takeing advantage of.
| Angry Bob wrote: | Lock-shot can’t target terrain. But Rackham couldn’t get that little detail in the main rulebook.
|
Just a quik reference again;Pg. 51 UNA AB. Medium Missle Launcher: and I quote:"This weapon has the locked shot ability", It then goes on to say, and I quote" It can target AFV OR terrain elements with structure points".
This means, they have the ability, if the mission states, Terrain element are allowed to be destroyed, back on page 97, of the main rulebook.
With saying that, Im not able to use all my abilitys in every game. the Therian cant use every single ability All the time. You have to simply meet the criteria to use it.
| Angry Bob wrote: | But Rackham couldn’t get that little detail in the main rulebook so it has to be changed in a forum because we don’t bother with regular FAQ’s like normal miniature companies.
|
Wrong!! AT-43 has a very nice, and very detailed FAQ. I also carry two copies every game I play in. But I dont break it out, for rules that are printed very clearly in the rulebooks.
| Angry Bob wrote: | Saying that the senario will tell when terrain can be destroyed when that logic isn’t in the main rulebook sounds like you are making up offical rules.
|
Once again, Pg.97, Mainrulebook, "When the mission allows it" I also linked you a Offical answer to this, from the game designer.
| Angry Bob wrote: | | I for one stopped going to the Rackham forums. The people there tend to be full of themselves. A disturbing group of them attack people when there is gripe that isn’t sanctioned. Case in point the UNA not being a complete rulebook or up to date they get hostile |
I believe, they ran you off the fourms, because you were only Bad mouthing the game, Nothing positive every came from your post. I can link those as well, if you wish.
| Angry Bob wrote: | If it is indirect fire people can bitch all they want about it being broken.
|
The only thing that really changed with indirect fire weapons, you have to actully hit your target with success, before you can start grounding the whole field. Take alook at the Red Bloks weapons, evry unit, almost has a real Grenade launcher or Mortar launcher. *NOT INCLUDING HAND GRENADE*, tHEY WOULD NEVER MISS THERE TARGET, ever. Now if you think that not Overly powerd , I dont know what to say. That would be boring for units with ALL AOE weapons.
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon.
Last edited by Sigma Golem on Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:18 pm; edited 2 times in total |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:48 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | Angry Bob wrote: | I volenteered to play by these optional indirrect rules knowing it was going to hurt me many more times than you. All because you weren't happy with the printed rules as they currently are.
So asking not to get screwed by a rule loophole of the Red Block is a very minor request.
It is all about the compramise. |
For your information, the Indirect Fire Rules, have been changed, and the way we played them, are the new offical way, they arent being printed in the second edition untill Operation Frotbite Comes out. |
An online forum does not count as a primary source of information. Secondary sources aren’t comparable to printed material at hand. Even a company released errata has game merit. But some posts of an unverfied guy over in France don't cut the mustard on something this serious.
I believe you when you said you read about this change. I have little doubt it will happen. Until then the offical published rules say otherwise.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Angry Bob wrote: | | The game has been more or less dead in Cincinnati since before December. George very-unfortunately had to stop playing, John got busy |
Thats a funny coment. The game isint dead, its played every week. Just not at a store that dosent support Rackham product, YET. |
I didn’t say the game was dead. I said it was dead in Cincinnati for all the previously stated reasons about lack of games going on in this area.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Angry Bob wrote: | | and where I showed up someplace to play no one else did |
I would soul search that for a moment. |
Considering it has been you who has set up game times, posted them and not shown up. Or not shown up when you said you would.
Yes you should soul search that a long time.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Angry Bob wrote: | | Up until then there was no ruling in the main book about this no-targeting terrain |
Page 97, from the ONLY AT-43 RULEBOOK EVER PUBLISHED.
And I quote" Terrain element may be destroyed using the sabotage ability" **WHICH I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO USE**
It then moves on to say, and I quote again,"However, when the mission allows it, some terrain elements may be destroyed by fighters weapon". Meaning ONLY if the mission specifically says, you are allowed to destroy terrain with either:
A. Locked Shot Weapons
B. Terrain with structure points
So far, NO AT-43 Missions allow you to desrtoy terrain, Because the UNA is the only Army with:
A. Locked Shot Weapons
B. Locked Shot Weapons
And you say your Massive and the most powerful army in the AT-43 Universe at this point, is being takeing advantage of. |
Agreed. It says it in a very around about way. Even an eigth grader grader could have typed, “terrain cannot be destroyed unless the senario states it.”
My only question is, are the French rules so badly written as well?
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Wrong!! AT-43 has a very nice, and very detailed FAQ. I also carry two copies every game I play in. But I dont break it out, for rules that are printed very clearly in the rulebooks. |
You couldn’t prove anything there. It was all, “no.”
When someone disagrees with me on a game in 40K or WFB I’ll either let it go or look it up for them. Because I have been wrong and I have been right. So it doesn’t hurt to verify.
As far as the FAQ goes. Unless it has been drastically cleaned up the complied forum answers are not neat, clean, although they are sorted.
Games Workshop has well published errata’s. Warmachine has at least well written published FAQs. Back in the day Warzone had a well prepared FAQs. Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | I believe, they ran you off the fourms, because you were only Bad mouthing the game, Nothing positive every came from your post. I can link those as well, if you wish. |
Not so. I tried to provide some technical writing to help clean up some things based on what they said. That drew some sad crybaby comment from one person.
Don’t you recall the one crybaby who if you disagreed would throw personal insults at people and basically ignore everything said? Even if you agreed with some of his arguments he still threw a tantrum.
We all know what happens when fan boys hear something they don’t like. Regardless of any reasons even if it low key. They attack. AT-43 has some very rabid fanboys.
That is why the Rackham forums are a very sad place. |
| | | | Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:56 pm | |
| | Angry Bob wrote: | An online forum does not count as a primary source of information. Secondary sources aren’t comparable to printed material at hand. Even a company released errata has game merit. But some posts of an unverfied guy over in France don't cut the mustard on something this serious.
|
Jean Bey, made it offical that the compiled current FAQ, is useable and offical.
| Quote: | | ="Angry Bob"] believe you when you said you read about this change. I have little doubt it will happen. Until then the offical published rules say otherwise |
Once again, the up-dated Indirect Fire rules, meaning the way we played will be printed in the up coming new frostbite rules as well.
The Indirect fire rules, the way they are printed in the Current AT-43 rulebook are completely broken. Once again, I opt to play the up-dated Indirect Fire Rules for your own sake. The Red Blok, when built for it, Has very nasty AOE Weapons in almost every unit. Wouldnt you rather play rules that take a wee bit of effert, or play by rules a child could use, and succeed with. Example: With the IDF rules, that you like to play with, allows my simple hand grenade pistol, allows me to shfire on a unit at range 6. So everbody understands, range six in feet is almost 3 feet. The entire length of the board.
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:09 pm | |
| For anyone who doesn't know Jean Bay is the Editing Dirrector for the AT-43 rulebook.
I'm hoping that this mean old Rackam errata is finally going to be updated and switched out. The one posted the company website. God willing checked by someone who knows what technical writing is. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:15 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | The Indirect fire rules, the way they are printed in the Current AT-43 rulebook are completely broken. Once again, I opt to play the up-dated Indirect Fire Rules for your own sake. The Red Blok, when built for it, Has very nasty AOE Weapons in almost every unit. Wouldnt you rather play rules that take a wee bit of effert, or play by rules a child could use, and succeed with. Example: With the IDF rules, that you like to play with, allows my simple hand grenade pistol, allows me to shfire on a unit at range 6. So everbody understands, range six in feet is almost 3 feet. The entire length of the board. |
Brian. I haven't dissagreed with you on the fairness indirrect.
You are right, they are wonky.
It is my bad that for any implying that the current indirrect rules are so wonderful and great. Sorry.
My comments on them are not meant to be supportive. They just make a good refrence point to pointing out the other problems with forum behavior or point problems in books. |
| | | | Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:34 pm | |
| I dont even care about indiect fire rules. It makes no difference.
I care about not being allowed to use my chick character, because of a simple ability. It would have effected your first actvation MAYBE. And you said, I wont play with her in a game. At the last minute, knowing I wouldnt change my army up, because of time.
You said You wouldnt play with my combat engineers blowing terrain either. You have seen me play them before. I ADVANCE my army all the way across the board in cover, blowing terrain to get there. And you know damm good and well, once the RED BLOK is in descent range, They are the most deadly outfit in the AT-43 Universe. Is this why you chopped the feet out from my army?
At the last minute, once you seen my army all laid out ready to play, you came up with all these rules and tech that you will refuse to play with, and was quite hot headed about it.
I wasnt allowed to use any of my Red Blok abilitys and equipment.
Thats how the red blok functipons, and you know this. They DO NOT function with brute power. The are a Pycological army. Thats there strength. And you know that..
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon. |
| | | | Sigma Golem
Initiate
Age : 34
Joined : 30 Nov 2007
Posts : 541
Location : The Front Line
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:09 pm | |
| | Angry Bob wrote: | Considering it has been you who has set up game times, posted them and not shown up. Or not shown up when you said you would.
|
You must be talking about the time you didnt check you pm, and we ALL went to Acme instead of Yottaquest for AT-43. Yup, we ended up playing until 200 am. It was so much fun to. Other than that, Ive only missed maybe 4 schduled games in 2 years, and for good reason to.
| Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy wrote: | | Games Workshop has well published errata’s. Warmachine has at least well written published FAQs. Back in the day Warzone had a well prepared FAQs. Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy |
AT-43 has been around for right at 1.5 years. Please, thats a outlandish report.
And here is a very in your face showing of the FAQ:
http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgjk9n73_1gfnf5f
I just browsed this, and asked myself a question, and was able to find a quick and clear answer, within seconds. 
EDIT:
| Angry Bob wrote: | | Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy |
I did a quik search and found this, by you Bob, Second sentence down :
http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=2217
"I believe it says the FAQ is great"
| Angry Bob wrote: | | I for one stopped going to the Rackham forums. The people there tend to be full of themselves. A disturbing group of them attack people when there is gripe that isn’t sanctioned |
Check this out: http://en-forum.at-43.com/viewtopic.php?t=2213&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
After re-reading thru your posts, I do understand why they got pissed off at you. You chimmed in at the 7th post or so. Check it out!!
_________________
AT-43
Operation Damocles ---- Operation Frostbite Campaign Coming Soon. |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:19 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | You must be talking about the time you didnt check you pm, and we ALL went to Acme instead of Yottaquest for AT-43. Yup, we ended up playing until 200 am. It was so much fun to. |
I checked my PM constantly until moving over here. No one ever told me you had a fight with the owner over at Yotta. Valid enough reason to stop playing there. Just a reason I found out very much later.
None of that matters because after George had to stop AT-43 lost its best support in Cinci.| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Other than that, Ive only missed maybe 4 schduled games in 2 years, and for good reason to. |
Of all the games you were supposed to show up at Scifi City that I went to, you've made it to one. So if most or all of those were at Scifi that may just be our bad luck.| Sigma Golem wrote: | | Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy wrote: | | Games Workshop has well published errata’s. Warmachine has at least well written published FAQs. Back in the day Warzone had a well prepared FAQs. Next to those the AT-43 compilation FAQ is very shoddy |
AT-43 has been around for right at 1.5 years. Please, thats a outlandish report. |
Mine is position of experience in all of those games.
What the games hang time in the market doesn't factor into the quality of the FAQ. Except maybe any excuses for having not improved it."And here is a very in your face," is not exactly a wise choice of words when discussing something. People tend to tune others out when name-calling starts.
If you will note I was trying to help out with the glaring language problem in the rules. Just posting an errata it could have come across as an insult for all the copy, sorting, and pasting it took to even get the FAQ to that point. Being a jerk to someone else's work was the last thing on my mind.
So I tried to be upbeat and positive. Which apparently wasn't enough for the quality of people over there.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | After re-reading thru your posts, I do understand why they got pissed off at you. You chimmed in at the 7th post or so. Check it out!! |
The specific guy I am talking about was one person who ended up in a long posting exchange that was just stupid.
There is something truly frustrating when the other person in a discussion can only throw insults and ignores the other end of it. What kind of person throws a tantrum while one agrees with them on parts?
Surely Brian you do not condone that kind of behavior? |
| | | | Angry Bob
Sergeant
Joined : 05 Jan 2008
Posts : 620
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:38 pm | |
| | Sigma Golem wrote: | | At the last minute, once you seen my army all laid out ready to play, you came up with all these rules and tech that you will refuse to play with, and was quite hot headed about it. |
What I was hot headed about was that broken power the one Red Block chic has. It's not even broken at all times, only during setup. For reasons you didn't have a problem with at the time.
And that anger wasn't at you but he creators of the game. You weren't pushing to use her.
Saying that I just starting making things up isn't true.
| Sigma Golem wrote: | | I wasnt allowed to use any of my Red Blok abilitys and equipment. |
Where did that come from?
The chic was only during deployment. If Rackham has even two brain cells they'll fix that game loopehole ASAP.
The Combat Engineers because you kept telling me I couldn't shoot terrain without shoing me any rules. That would have required showing me one of those printed recent FAQ post compilations.
You still had the option for three weapon specialists in your squads to my two. The super twins who get to stack their Repairs with a point discount on their AFV to my Newton on Number One who pays extra but can't stack hers Repairs.
On top of that I pay a big point hike for Stark who because of the new rules pays 150pts for a mortar shot that missed and went no where in that game. So glad Rackham can "fix" the rules for everybody but the UNA.
I really hope Brian you don't think that my anger over Rackhams stupidity isn't targeted at you. Because that would be a really big bad on my part if it is the case. |
| | | | Matt
Supreme Forum Overlord
Joined : 19 Aug 2007
Posts : 3094
Location : Cincinnati, OH
| | Subject: Re: Rules for Angry Bob Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:02 pm | |
| Alright guys...
Take it to PM.
[locked-Matt]
_________________
Dark Angels 1750 win/loss Record
Win - 22 (The Dark Angels wiped some silly pod marines)
Loss - 13 (Brice's Necrons wiped me)
Draw - 2 (The 13th hold out in alpha take and hold)
http://mcelv.blogspot.com/ |
| | | | |
| Page 1 of 1 |
| | Permissions of this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| | |
| |
Home
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
