Switch Theme:

40k Armies and the Battered Wife Syndrome  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






South NJ/Philly

This is something I've seen quite a bit when it comes to armies that are underpowered in 40k, though I've mostly seen it with respect to Orks, GK Demon Hunters, and sometimes IG players. 

Basically if you go to a 40k forum that focuses on one of these armies or to a normal 40k board and talk about what kind of updates these armies should recieve to make them more competitive you will hear all sorts of inane things like:

1.) "Our army isn't underpowered! I win with them all the time! You just don't know how to use them!"
2.) "If you don't play in tournaments then our army is fine! Stay away from people with cheesy lists!"
3.) "I like the fact that our army is underpowered and I hope GW doesn't make us cheesy like SM/Chaos/Eldar/Tau/Necrons/etc"

Honestly it just drives me bonkers when I hear these people go off.   This isn't limited to just army players but people who favor a certain unit.  I've seen people go on and on about how great Sisters Repentia or acroflagellants and Penitent Engines are.  Ditto on people talking about Shoota Boyz and Stikk Bommas, Mandrakes, and whatever other unit you can think of that is simply not worth the points.

It just gets really annoying, especially if you play one of these armies or own models from a specific unit that is pretty well underpowered.  It just reminds me of the Battered Wife Syndrome where a woman is stuck with an abusive husband but refuses to leave or admit anything is wrong.

Sorry for the rant, but I've seen too much of this for multiple things I either own or for stuff my friends use.  That and I've been at work since 3:30AM and needed to rant anyway.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut



California

Perhaps you forget the reason most people play 40k...

FUN.

Often, these supposedly underpowered units are actually really fun to use. Arcoflaggelants for example. Have you ever run a unit of three into a squad of termies, and rolled triple 6's? I have, and it was damn cool!

Repentia too...don't you think a unit of hot half naked women carrying huge chainswords flinging themselves into combat is sexy...er...I mean cool?

These people play with underpowered armies cause they enjoy them, the fluff, the models and the game play. 40k is more than simply winning - anyone can do that. 40k IMO is about enjoying oneself.

For the record, I LOVE the raptor champion. I run a unit of 5 with three meltas, and not once has the 50+ pt champ made combat, but EVERY game I use him, and plan to keep on doing it cause it's cool.

Chuck

"I know what hearsay is, I do not know what a federal librarian is as I am not American and to me a librarian is a person who helps you find books and then returns them back to their shelves or stacks at night (so your credentials do not awe me, and do not impress me" -
IG fan 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Macon, GA

Yeah, I've seen this a lot as well, especially on army specific forums. I'm not sure it's BWS, but I think it's clearly psychological.

1) People identify themselves by their armies. And if they're the guy with 30 Ogryn in his list, and then Ogryn become powerful in the next codex, his identity will no longer be unique.

2) People buy units based on many factors, and might not want to admit that they made a mistake in buying and painting an underperfoming unit. Instead, they'll make excuses, or configure lists so that the weak unit shines.

there are also positive reasons people might defend armies or units:
- they simply like the fluff or model (repentia are the big winner here)
- their environment actually is a good one for that unit (if you fight orks all the time, Ogryn become better)
- They like racking up best army/best sport awards at tournaments, and it's easier to do if your army sucsk.

Finally, keep in mind how many people play in very small communities. If three peopel play each other all the time, armes and units that are bad in the greater meta-game might succeed.

My Painted Armies
: Co. B, 37th Praetorian IG: 21,000pts
KOW Ogres: 4500 points
Loyalist Emperor's Children: 2500 points 
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






South NJ/Philly

Posted By chuckyhol on 09/21/2006 8:26 AM
Perhaps you forget the reason most people play 40k...

FUN.

Often, these supposedly underpowered units are actually really fun to use. Arcoflaggelants for example. Have you ever run a unit of three into a squad of termies, and rolled triple 6's? I have, and it was damn cool!

Repentia too...don't you think a unit of hot half naked women carrying huge chainswords flinging themselves into combat is sexy...er...I mean cool?

These people play with underpowered armies cause they enjoy them, the fluff, the models and the game play. 40k is more than simply winning - anyone can do that. 40k IMO is about enjoying oneself.

For the record, I LOVE the raptor champion. I run a unit of 5 with three meltas, and not once has the 50+ pt champ made combat, but EVERY game I use him, and plan to keep on doing it cause it's cool.

Chuck

This is exactly the mentality I'm talking about.

So Repentia can be fun to model, paint, or whatever you want to do with the fluff.

Does this mean that they should remain a unit that is highly overcosted for what it does, or that they shouldn't otherwise be beefed up?

What about entire armies that are underpowered?  Footslogging Orks or Thousand Sons are overcosted/underpowered, are you saying that because they're fun that they shouldn't be brought in line with other armies when their new codex's come out?

Shoota Boyz, Ork Bikes, Storm Boyz, Stikkbommas, are you saying that these units with nice (mostly) models shouldn't be transformed from the laughable units they are now to something decent?  I'm sorry but just because something underpowered is fun doesn't mean that it shouldn't be fixed when the chance to update their rules comes around.

How exactly are the two mutually exclusive?  Do these units become less fun once they're not overpriced/underpowered?

I use unoptimized stuff all the time in friendly games.  Heck I lose most of the time when I got to my local GW store even with my marines because I don't bring my Pod list, I bring fluffy 10 Man Squad lists.  I don't mind, I have fun.  But what's NOT fun is when I put footslogging Orks down and my opponents go in the back of their deployment zone and just fire and send the mobile shooty stuff forwards to just screw up my army.  It's no fun when your army is easily beaten all the time.   Talk to some all Grey Knight or Thousand Sons players too, it's not a whole lot of fun when other armies can see your strenghts and glaring weaknesses and just pound you an entire game.
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




Are you saying that the Imperial Guard codex, as a whole, is underpowered?  If so, I guess my response would fall under #1 "Our army isn't underpowered!"

I played Guard, and I won more games than I lost with them.  I also have a friend that played Guard, and he lost about every game he played with them.  So, you see, it's not always about the codex...

   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






South NJ/Philly

Posted By BitFlip on 09/21/2006 9:19 AM

Are you saying that the Imperial Guard codex, as a whole, is underpowered?  If so, I guess my response would fall under #1 "Our army isn't underpowered!"

I played Guard, and I won more games than I lost with them.  I also have a friend that played Guard, and he lost about every game he played with them.  So, you see, it's not always about the codex...


Guard aren't terribly underpowered.  They're not as bad off as say codex Orks or Pure GK's, but I don't think that guard can stand up against a lot of the tournament armies.

Guard have some units that are really good and others that could use a decent boost - Ogryns come to mind.  Are you saying that the guard codex is well balanced against other codex's and doesn't need any tweaking?


   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




No, they probably could use some tweaking.  I just don't agree that the army as a whole is "underpowered." 

   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




iowa

i agree that there are some pretty weak units in the majority of armies. i just wish the game developers could see the same things we see.

there will always be some clown who will defend these crap units/armies. pete haines defended thousand suns becasue they had 2 wounds.

 white dwarf always tries to pimp these crappy units. in truth most armies only get about 50% of their units on the table, the other half nobody uses.

When I'm in power, here's how I'm gonna put the country back on its feet. I'm going to put sterilizing agents in the following products: Sunny Delight, Mountain Dew, and Thick-Crust Pizza. Only the 'tardiest of the 'tards like the thick crust. 
   
Made in us
Executing Exarch





Los Angeles

Statement #1 (you suck learn to play) might be better rephrased as "I win with (insert codex of your choice here) all the time. You just need to learn how to build an effective fighting force from your codex". I don't think there is a codex out there that can't field a winning army (although admittedly its harder for some than others). The thing is that, despite the point system that is trying to remedy the issue, not all units were created equal. I think the most glaring example of this is the current eldar codex. Falcons, Eldar Dreadnaughts, Star Cannons, and Farseer/warlock squads are all examples of things that are really good and everyone takes. Armies comprised of lots of these things tend to do well... so much so that lots of people cry cheese at them. However if you look on the other side, Swooping hawks, shining spears, wraithguard, jet bikes, and vibro cannons are all things that you would laugh at if you saw hit the field because they are complete crap for what they cost in points. Is the eldar codex weak? No it isn't. It just has some seriously bad units in it. Should all the units be viable choices in some way, fashion, or form? Probably, but balancing like that is rather difficult and is unlikely to ever actually happen. I would be pleased to see them work on it though. Do I still occasionally field my swooping hawks or my jetbikes? Yes, yes I do. Why do I do it? Well I spent the time and effort to give them all really good paint jobs so I like them to be seen every once in a while. I've also won enough games that I don't feel I have anything more I need to prove, so I can lose a game here or there due to "poor army selection" and not feel bad.

**** Phoenix ****

Threads should be like skirts: long enough to cover what's important but short enough to keep it interesting. 
   
Made in us
Fireknife Shas'el





A bizarre array of focusing mirrors and lenses turning my phrases into even more accurate clones of

I don't think it's BWS as much as it is people wanting to rationalize their $300+ purchase after they found out it sucked. Then again, I'm sure this blurs into BWS at some point. With the "support group" of people who are already suffering from similar effects, the forum becomes much like an anorexia forum (never visit those! I was scarred for life even though I went in there to get a few LOLS) where people keep telling each other it's OK until newcomers eventually join in.

WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS

2009, Year of the Dog
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Philadelphia, PA

It depends a lot on the mission played and role of the unit. Not everything is shooting, HTH & armor saves. If I use Mandrakes, for example, overcosted & sucky at HtH & shooting, but they take an objective and win the game -- were they sucky then?

Clear the battlefield and let me see
All the profit from our victory.
 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Posted By chuckyhol on 09/21/2006 8:26 AM
Perhaps you forget the reason most people play 40k...

FUN.

Often, these supposedly underpowered units are actually really fun to use.
Utterly irrelevent. There's no reason why 'fun' and 'powerful' should be so incongruent. All units should be powerful and useful. There should be no dud units that some people use just because they're 'fun'.

BYE

   
Made in us
Fireknife Shas'el





A bizarre array of focusing mirrors and lenses turning my phrases into even more accurate clones of

If I use Mandrakes, for example, overcosted & sucky at HtH & shooting, but they take an objective and win the game -- were they sucky then?


Your Wyches and Dark Lancing warriors can do the same thing, right?

WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS

2009, Year of the Dog
 
   
Made in fi
Regular Dakkanaut




I find no fun in playing with poor units no matter how cool models or background stories they might have. An entire army can be ruined by bad rules, and GW does it all the time. I'd guess that when you encounter a person defending a horribly ineffective unit and claiming that he wins games with it all the time, you've just met a kid whose mum bought him a box of miniatures for christmas and now refuses to believe he was given crap wrapped in gold paper.

Well, as Ed Maule once famously said: "Therion's from Finland, where comp does not exist. Where he's from the trash we're forced to field for a tournament would lose to a 12 year old." - bigchris1313 
   
Made in us
Clousseau





Wilmington DE

You know what else is fun? Getting those expensive units to do something before they get shot to pieces. It can be fun to lose, but only to lose well, and bringing a knife to a gun fight counts as losing poorly in my book.

That said, I just did exactly that. I busted out a totally underperforming Eldar list this past week against a more optimized guard list. Jetbikes, warp spiders, banshees, scorps, scatter lasers, 2 wraithlords and swooping hawks. I still got a tie, but a lot of that had to do with only playing 3 rounds, I'm sure.

So, why'd I play it? I KNEW it was underpowered, and I fielded it anyway, because I want my armies to be DIVERSE (I've given up on true balance). I want to field units that look cool, which means I accept that those units are often the wrong tool for the wrong job. But, if I'm going to play 40k (a game I'm drifting further and further away from), then I might as well play with the figs I've got and like.

Confusing? Hypocritical? Contradictory? Confounding? Welcome to 40k...

Guinness: for those who are men of the cloth and football fans, but not necessarily in that order.

I think the lesson here is the best way to enjoy GW's games is to not use any of their rules.--Crimson Devil 
   
Made in fi
Regular Dakkanaut




I played against an Eldar player like that. He said he wanted to use all the cool models from 2nd edition and fielded a lot of Dark Reapers, infiltrated some Scorpions, footslogged some Wraithguard and so on. I wiped him off the field in short order and the game wasn't fun for either of us. In fact it was a total waste of time, and I wouldn't have played it unless it wasn't a league game. Seriously, we can talk hours and hours about Exarch Darkus Reaperus polishing his badass armour and honing his skills to sublime perfection and being a veteran of a million battles from the dawn of time, but in the game world the unit is deployed and removed right afterwards. Playing with units and armies like that isn't fun for anyone involved.

Well, as Ed Maule once famously said: "Therion's from Finland, where comp does not exist. Where he's from the trash we're forced to field for a tournament would lose to a 12 year old." - bigchris1313 
   
Made in au
Been Around the Block




Rockhampton

I may not play weak units ( well i try not too) but when i collect anrmy I like to have at least one of every unit available as a sort of completness thing I guess. We will never see the end of cheese accusations or people defending their favourite units. I won't lower myself to say its just a game (yeah right) but bloody hell, there is more important things to worry about I would think. No offense.

The only cheese thing as far as I'm concerned is the GW pricing department or old gamers who pick on kids. Oh and Godfather Pt 3. It sucks.

The leprechaun tells me to burn things. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




*I* play with wacky not-so-powerful units now. Why? I'm bored.

Yes, bored. There is only SO many times I can slap down the 3 exorcist, all mounted sister army with serpahim and jump pack cannoness. I can only do it for so long before I get freaking bored. Its almost formulamatic on ho wto play the army. It stops being fun, and becomes more like work.

SO I use otehr units. archos, pentinet engines, large foot squads, inducted guard....especially in CoD games(where the former two are VERY good).

Hell I got a nice scout marine army set up and building, 6 scout squads, 3 scout bike squads, and other toys. Yeah it isnt the most powerful, but it was ok, and was alot more fun.

Now I got Ogryns coming in from trade. Yeah yeah, rough riders are better, but so what. I got those too, for my guard army. I'm just not interested in making th emost powerful build anymore. Throw some dice, and have some fun.

If I need to beat a mauleed patetrn army, dorp pod or otherwise, I'll break sisters back out. Otherwise its more for fun now....

Hope more old fools come to their senses and start giving you their money instead of those Union Jack Blood suckers...  
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Southeastern PA, USA

SO I use otehr units. archos, pentinet engines, large foot squads, inducted guard....especially in CoD games(where the former two are VERY good).


This kinda led into my thoughts on the matter. Namely, the effectiveness of a unit largely depends on your context. If 40K means only standard tournament games to you, you're going to have a different point of view from someone who plays a mix of regular 40K and CoD, for instance. It's interesting how many "ineffective" units become effective in CoD. Mandrakes are one of them...

My World Eaters Showcase
View my Genestealer Cult! Article - Gallery - Blog
Best Appearance - GW Baltimore GT 2008, Colonial GT 2012

DQ:70+S++++G+M++++B++I+Pw40k90#+D++A+++/fWD66R++T(Ot)DM+++

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I'd NEVER field either archos or Pentients in a tournment or normal games. There isnt enough terrain to make it worth it.

But a good CoD game with lots of buildings and ruins means lots to hide in and around, and their fleet doesnt care about Difficult terrain.

Hope more old fools come to their senses and start giving you their money instead of those Union Jack Blood suckers...  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Whorelando, FL

It also is interesting to see how the often-thought effective units suck giant-sized porno nuts in CoD. Rough Riders come to mind...

Capt K

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Orlando, Florida

(double post)


Current Armies: Blood Angels, Imperial Guard (40k), Skorne, Retribution (Warmachine), Vampire Counts (Fantasy)

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Orlando, Florida

I find CoD to be a great equalizer for units in 40K. I can't think of a single unit that is crappy in standard 40k that isn't useful in CoD.

Besides, it does tend to get boring if you are constantly playing against fully optimised armies. I don't begrudge somebody for ever breaking out a Land Raider, they like the model and seem to get something out of it.

The thing I do get tired of quick is playing against opponents that aren't interested in at least trying to become a better player with a better list. But at the end of the day, that is their decision.

Current Armies: Blood Angels, Imperial Guard (40k), Skorne, Retribution (Warmachine), Vampire Counts (Fantasy)

 
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Southeastern PA, USA

I find CoD to be a great equalizer for units in 40K. I can't think of a single unit that is crappy in standard 40k that isn't useful in CoD.


I'm still not a fan of Lictors or Biovores in CoD. Lictors are slightly better in the sense that they tend to have more DS opportunies in CoD, I just think they're still underwhelming for the points. But don't get me started on GW and Lictors...

It also is interesting to see how the often-thought effective units suck giant-sized porno nuts in CoD.


Yep. Like I said, it's not easy to say unit X "sucks" or "rocks" anymore without qualifiers. Hopefully GW will continue releasing supplements like CoD, as I think it can only improve the game and people's enjoyment of it. Prior to CoD, if you had shelled out a ton of money for and taken the time to paint up a big Repentia unit, you were probably fairly unhappy with GW and your purchase.

My World Eaters Showcase
View my Genestealer Cult! Article - Gallery - Blog
Best Appearance - GW Baltimore GT 2008, Colonial GT 2012

DQ:70+S++++G+M++++B++I+Pw40k90#+D++A+++/fWD66R++T(Ot)DM+++

 
   
Made in us
Awesome Autarch






San Diego, California

The thing I do get tired of quick is playing against opponents that aren't interested in at least trying to become a better player with a better list. But at the end of the day, that is their decision.


I totally agree with that, and those tend to be the people that scream cheese the loudest. I cant help it, I play to win. If i am messing around with my buddies in a non serious game over beers for laughs, ill take the crappy units that are cool fluff wise. But in pretty much any other situation, i cant bring myself to put "cool" units on the board (no matter how well I painted them) becuase i hate playing with what i think are inferior units.

And i know the feeling of playing a game with an opitmized army against a non optimized army. It just plain is not fun. You cream some poor guy and he resents playing you and you are about as engaged in the game as you would be watching paint dry.

The most fun I ever have playing 40K is against a tough, well painted, army comanded by a good general. Even if you lose, at the least you are fully brought into the game and are utilizing every trick and tactic you know of and every roll of the dice is full of tension. That, to me, is the best.

But everyone does play for different reasons and I am in 100% agreement that every unit should be powerful and well costed. Your biggest dilema while building an army should be which combo of units you should bring this time because they are too many to choose from, not how you can squeeze as many optimalized units in as possible, because there are only two or three worth taking.

   
Made in us
Fireknife Shas'el





A bizarre array of focusing mirrors and lenses turning my phrases into even more accurate clones of

People seem to equate boring with optimized lists. That is not the list's fault. That is one, or both, player's fault. It is not the list's fault if a thought-provocative game is not played. In chess, the same "optimized" (hehe, compared to all pawns I guess) list is played every single time. Yet chess players never tire of playing the game - why? They find opponents that stimulate their competitive, or wacky-fun, nature. The only difference with chess and 40k is that chess has a global tournament scoring system so it's easier to find opponents you'll find interesting to play, but it is still the 40k player's responsibility to find opponents he finds mentally engaging.

WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS

2009, Year of the Dog
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





One of the best articles on games development I've read was by Mark Rosewater about Magic: The Gathering. He answered the question of why some cards HAVE to be underpowered.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr5

The same logic applies to Games Workshop. Some units HAVE to be less effective than their points cost warrants. Basically he says there are 7 main reasons and here they are applying to GW.

  1.  All the units cannot be good.
  2. Different units appeal to different players.
  3. Diversity of unit powers is key to discovery.
  4. Power levels are relative.
  5. Diversity of power rewards the skilled player.
  6. People like finding "hidden" gems.
  7. R&D is only human.

Seriously read the article.


Nothing Can Kill The Grimace

Any conversation about composition scoring on DakkaDakka is the blind leading the blind.
Or the evil leading the blind, more accurately. - xtapl 
   
Made in us
Fireknife Shas'el





A bizarre array of focusing mirrors and lenses turning my phrases into even more accurate clones of

Nice article. I remember reading it way back when I tinkered with Magic but later decided to play Decipher's SWCCG instead. Boo magic.

The difference between the two companies, however, is that Trading Card games must have bad cards because there would be no point to players buying more cards if all the commons were awesomely useful (yay alpha!). Without players buying boxes and boxes just to get 4x ______, trading card companies would go belly up. Of course, Wizards R&D won't ever admit to business reasons in plain writing, so you'll need to read between the lines. The idiotic and ironic thing here is that GW sets out to make money itself but constantly hampers itself when it nerfs rules for a certain unit but creates a new sculpt for that unit with the same quarter of a year. Seriously, WTF? It looks like Eldar are getting that same treatment, but fortunately (to the thousands of marine players) Marines got their uber-powerful new terminator sculpts - and the GW business is successful at charging these players a premium price.

I do agree with 5 and 6 though. I remember creating a certain light-side SWCCG deck that nobody ever set out to do (even scoured the popular message boards for it) and won a few local tournies and a state or regional. Only problem was I was missing one or three power cards but that's beside the point. However, again it doesn't really apply to wargames. Wargames have very few choices compared to card games and there's less combinatorial power with the different choices. Card games revolve around multiple-card manipulations and deck access. The closest you get with wargames are combined-arms tactics and gear that allows hidden/restricted units to come onto the field faster. It is a lot more superficial and doesn't require memorizing a thousand card texts to realize you could make a manipulative discard-search-control deck nobody else has ever thought of.  Furthermore, while there are armies that require combined arms (IMO Tau, Tyranids, feral orks, O&G), there are armies that are one-dimensional killfests that ruin it for everyone.


WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS

2009, Year of the Dog
 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
The Tyranny of Evil Men




Los Angeles

Posted By stonefox on 09/25/2006 9:56 PM

Nice article. I remember reading it way back when I tinkered with Magic but later decided to play Decipher's SWCCG instead. 

Good choice.  SWCCG kicked ass.

"The last known instance of common sense happened at a GT. A player tried to use the 'common sense' argument vs. Mauleed to justify his turbo-boosted bikes getting a saving throw vs. Psycannons. The player's resulting psychic death scream erased common sense from the minds of 40k players everywhere. " - Ozymandias 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Whorelando, FL

I agree with stoney and bigchris....SWCCG did kick ass. I still have my cards and unforntunately can't play anymore since I moved away from where there was still a solid following of the game. Oh well. Ah the days of playing sniper with a disruption pistol, bouncing a character, then starting a battle firing another weapon and playing "slight weapons malfunction"....loved it.

Capt K

   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: