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.

at m lgs i saw a capture and control
he placed his objective in a building atleast 12 inches high.
but here is the thing. the guy who placed the objective was facing an all bike army.
so what would you do in this situation.

To be fair I'd probably call it the building itself, making units inside of, on top of, in base contact with, or if it's ruins in the area terrain associated with the piece able to capture, control or contest.

garret wrote:at m lgs i saw a capture and control
he placed his objective in a building atleast 12 inches high.
but here is the thing. the guy who placed the objective was facing an all bike army.
so what would you do in this situation.

Laugh, and play it out. If I kill all of his troops, he can't hold his objective anyway.

If you bring an all-bike army, you have to be prepared for situations like that.

Point out that the opponent can't capture the objective and that it would be an unfun game? Unless the bike player likes it somehow. But for the most I'd probably just stay out of it and remember that that guy is a donkey-cave and not verse him as he seems to be the WAAC type which is very rarely fun to play against. I say very rarely because it can be a good challenge sometimes, this doesn't seem like one of those times.

Or you could make a rule that the bikes can use one movement phase to drive up the side which counts as difficult terrain but he gets a -1 to his dice roll (there is gravity you know).

Maybe he shouldn't play all-bike and this can be a learning point.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Maybe he shouldn't play all-bike and this can be a learning point.

EXACTLY!...
THe bike player has to realize there will be situations his army will not be able to deal with being all mounted. His opponent was super smart by denying him the objective. He let terrain defend it while his entire force could focus on the enemys objective. Right from the start the worst he could do is a TIE....

I'd say rule it so it's possible or change the spot. By rights, if you make it impossible for someone to have a go at winning before the game even starts, then what exactly is the point of the game? Saying "you shouldn't roll a bike army" isn't necessarily right either. Obviously someone spent time and money assembling a perfectly legal army they felt they'd enjoy. Why rob them of that. Beat them through tactically playing, not a cheap cop-out before the game starts.

garret wrote:at m lgs i saw a capture and control
he placed his objective in a building atleast 12 inches high.
but here is the thing. the guy who placed the objective was facing an all bike army.
so what would you do in this situation.

I would kill every single thing he fielded on the table , starting from the objective as the epicenter.

Placing the objective above ground level is tactical playing. His opponent can still win, by wiping out, holding his own objective and denying his opponent the building objective. It increases the difficulty but it's an inherent weakness of playing a bike army.

Stop portraying it like some extreme RAW douchebaggery typo abuse forcing a one sided fight because it isn't.

I think its legal for sure. Not his fault the opponent played a full bike army. And on the other end, its not the bikers fault the other guy is smart enough to legally put a marker in a building.

That situation is when, like stated earlier, you beat the piss out of the opponent and win the game brute force. Honestly thats the way I like it anyways lol. When brains fail to move a wall, you smash that bitch to the ground.

Food Store Hero wrote:By rights, if you make it impossible for someone to have a go at winning before the game even starts, then what exactly is the point of the game?

Saying "you shouldn't roll a bike army" isn't necessarily right either.

It's not impossible. If he tables my army, or keeps me away from both while holding his Objective, he wins.

Nobody's saying that. We're saying that he needs to learn to take the good with the bad when he takes an extreme list, and some games are going to be inherently difficult for him. Let's face it - in many games, the ability to have an entire army of T5 models which Turbo-Boosts 24" for invulnerable saves is going have certain advantages. So the idea that he should get a pass in other games doesn't sit well for me. If he can't deal with that, then that's his problem, not his opponent's.

I agree with you guys on that. All I'm saying is so long as there is in fact a possibility at winning, then hey, go for it. If it makes it all but impossible is when I feel it's unnecessary. Especially if it's simply a non-tourney game.

AtraAngelis wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Maybe he shouldn't play all-bike and this can be a learning point.

EXACTLY!...
THe bike player has to realize there will be situations his army will not be able to deal with being all mounted. His opponent was super smart by denying him the objective. He let terrain defend it while his entire force could focus on the enemys objective. Right from the start the worst he could do is a TIE....

Why would the OP waste valuable hours of his life learning from his experience.
Agree to a house rule for the game-bikes can go up, the whole building is the objective-something. Else this guy is a cranial rectal inversion and you've better uses for your time than dicking around with a, well dick.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

avantgarde wrote:Placing the objective above ground level is tactical playing. His opponent can still win, by wiping out, holding his own objective and denying his opponent the building objective. It increases the difficulty but it's an inherent weakness of playing a bike army.

Stop portraying it like some extreme RAW douchebaggery typo abuse forcing a one sided fight because it isn't.

1. It is legal. 2. It is indeed RAW douchebaggery (IF the opponent didn't see the issue which could be the case).
Again, if the opponent knew this, why would the OP waste his time.
Simply make a house rule agreement for the game, or if the opponent is being TFG just "yep you won. Can you remove your stuff? I'm going to play that guy standing next to you now. Have a nice day. "

How do you beat a mall-cop on a Segway? Go up a set of stairs.
So one's an idiot and the other is a douchebag. The real question is which one is worse?