The main problem with this example is that you've just designed an overwhelmingly large amount of your army around how not to lose, rather than how to win. A player who isn't concentrating 200 points of units to cover the main fault of a 190 point unit, but is using units that don't need that much support, will have an advantage. I get the impression you are a fairly good player, so maybe you can figure out how to win with such an overwhelming disadvantage. However, the average player can't and won't bother -- and many good players would rather have that advantage as well, to maximize their chances of winning tournaments. If this sort wants to win, he'll either pick from the limited pool of charge mechs or no mech at all. What that results in is a boring metagame, where you see the same stupid units over and over, as most players aren't as bold in their army selection as you are.

See, even you seem to realize that the rules are out of whack by the fact you realized you would have to go to great lengths to make Mason usable. Maybe you don't agree the rules should change, but you realize they're out of whack. That's a start.

I've long been asking for change -- possibly not a charge nerf per se. I just want to see a little parity between ranged mechs and charge mechs, whether that's a charge nerf or something else to encourage shooting, I don't care. Obviously, I, like every other player, have my own ideas of how to best implement that, but it's neither here nor there in this conversation.

I understand there are people who think the game is fine and I accept that and listen to their opinions. I don't agree and don't understand how they can feel that way, but I don't attempt to belittle their opinions like many seem to do ours, by classifying us as whiners or making our desire for change sound selfish ("just screaming that this game is not what THEY want," to quote a recent one)... But I think that may be because we don't have to. As much as you guys try to deny the evidence, we desiring change are, in fact in the majority.

-Jim
(hey look, I even avoided using that derogatory term for charge involving simians!)

I play HL almost exclusively, I love the high defense, decent range and nice mix of spec. abilities. I do wish they had higher targeting numbers, but thats what formations are for.
and rear archs, and softening high defenses with Armor Piercing Artillery Rounds

there is always a way to beat someone.

Yeah, so would I. But I play under house rules more often than not. Just cause I luv the game does not mean it could be better. And the rule changes failed to address the core problem in the game: the most expensive pieces in the game cannot move and shoot whilst everyone else can.

I try to as well. It just makes more sense. But where I play it is a RARE thing. And I fully expect to be dusted playing against the best players in the area (none of which follow faction purity ROE).

If I ever saw such a silly thing coming at me, I would laugh. Not that it is not effective, its just goofy. A game system which promotes such goofiness needs tweeking. A little realism is a good thing. Mechs like mason should not need a VTOL shield.


And...
Thats not what they said. Of course, you cannot check this since their posts were deleted. Its hard to believe that WK would delete "I'm taking a leave of absence" post. I have a sneaking subsiption that our high profile quitters still break out the plastic robots once and while.

No, you are not. That has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by Flankerpilot. The Majority of a minority, maybe, but not overall, that has never been proven.

While I agree that I am using VAST resources to protect a single fig, those resources are incredibly potent as an offensive weapon as well. Rather than send the VTOLS out on their own to hunt down their own separate targets, I hunt with a pack mentality, that way, while I am able to utilize the massive offensive capabilities provided me, but I can also defend myself.

Also, I play with a lot of good players. I feel that they are good because they are learning ways to deal with the current environment. They are able to develop strategies that bend and break the current powerhouses! And while they occasionally play with mixed armies and employ "broken" strategies, more often than not, those armies don't do so well.

And I too respect your opinion on the subject, and as I said, while I would like to see a tweak or two (Simplest being to give targets of charge a +2 to defense), I and my players will continue to enjoy this game and find ways to overcome the obstacles placed in our way by the current metagame (there, I said it. Does that make me an authority now?).:cheeky:

Tony

Actually, 3-4% of an entire population is enough to get drug approvals thru the FDA, predict elections, and PROVE scientific theories. Often times a 1% sample of a large population is considered statistically valid.

But it is not enough for the JEBs.

You want realism? It's not uncommon (in fact it's standard practice) for Armored columns to advance under the cover of air support. That's realism. Just because you think it's goofy, doesn't mean it needs changed. Should a formation of M1-A1 Abrhams not need the cover of a squad of Apaches?

Think outside of the box!

Tony

That and the results are rather simplistic because some venue may not have cheese played at them but the players would like to see some changes to certain things about the game.

By your point of view 400 some people stating what goes on at their venue is immediately proof that only 400 people of 4000 want to see changes in the rules of some kind.

So in reality I respect that percentage about as much as most politicians, quite little.

A lot of people hope for change of some kind, those that don't do seem to be extremely vocal I must admit.


That and to the army with Mason posted earlier.

Something like that is pretty odd to see and although air support is common for armoured unit's it's not common for that air support to linger within 20 some yards of the armoured vehicles, that's why it looks freaky as heck. That and the Apaches don't fly around an Abrams so a dune buggy doesn't ram the tank and blow it apart.

Exactly. I think the MWRealms population has a good mix of the different viewpoints and represents a fairly good sample. Bigger issues are predicated on smaller samples in other arenas.

Are we saying that since only 4% of some group answered a poll in a certain way that that proves anything? Come on!

I had a ranking before I ever played!!! That doesn't mean I had any ideas at all on any subject related to MW - at least none that mattered.

Also, how many of that total number ever saw or had a chance to see that poll? No one can say with any amount of certainty. How many saw it but didn't feel strongly enough - either way - to vote on it? No one can say. How many saw the posts, saw it was going in 'their direction' and decided not to vote either way? No one can say. How many didn't care? NO ONE KNOWS!

Geez guys! Let's not asign any conclusions to a group whose size isn't even statistically significant and, as far as we know, doesn't constitute a representative cross-section of the overall population.

Good players such as yourself do come up with inventive ways to defeat commonly used pieces. Thats not the point. Airpower is not used in this fashion.

Too much thinking outside the box for wargames can be a bad thing. Silly tactics make for silly games. If I wanted silly, I would play Jr. Monopoly.

PS- I had to ask. How does such a formation withstand a dual SS AA barrage?

Easilly... In two turns it's under the artys min arty range! That and if you're firing at the formation, my arty's firing on yours!!

Tony

@SWTony: Do you really have room for arty with all those other units making up the formation in a 300 or even 450 point game? Just the mechs bust 300. This would have to be for a very high points game -- 350ish points of mechs, between 90-150 points in VTOLs (depending on what kind you're using), a 20ish point command vehicle and Zahn/DI Towed combo at around 50-60 points -- at least a 600 point game, which I rarely see people play at tournaments.

Also, to be under minimum range in two turns you've just given up the best click on each of your VTOLs to push damage, which I don't see as a very good plan.

OMG.... TACTICS!!!

Besides, most of the time the point is to have fun. If you're investing such a large amount of emotion in the game, leading to such frustration, you're probably overdoing it a wee tiny bit.

Have fun at your venue. The other players might follow suit. Play inspite of the perceived weaknesses in the game, and you might end up having fun and making more friends and less in the way of fellow grumblers.

I mean no offense to those who genuinely feel that they have a grievance, or see Wizkids as lacking. Its just that yes you have the right to post your opinions and hope Wizkids listens. But what are you going to do in the meantime? Here's the answer: Play the game well and truly, come up with new house rules, heck play with abrupt elevated, and enjoy yourselves.