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.

Well guys , im sort of confused about one thing.
Why does this sentence keep comming up in this thread?

Cairnius wrote:The truth is, Luna doesn't know how the game is. She's been told how it is by the fans over on the AT-43 forums

I have read the rules book , i have seen the unique game system only AT-43 have. And i love these rules ( specifically overwatch /zone of fire / combat movement )
Now , how does been an inexperienced AT-43 player have ANYTHING to do with me liking those rules?

I've been parroting fans on AT-43 forums? Umm , lets see. So far i only browse the "workshop" section of the forum. I have ZERO interest in what others like or dislike
because simply they are them , i am me. I'll consider the reasons for them , but by no means do i like things purely because others do.
Those rules i love are what i love MYSELF ALONE. Are you saying someone that plays warhammer and read the rule books cant figure out what the rules are made for?

So far you are just assuming. Assuming that anyone that likes the rules = only parrots /die hard fans/ brainless newbies. My god are you ignorant.

I dont want to be snobbish but , you do realize AT-43 is not my first war game ? Check my gallery and you can have idea of the army list i ran from the models used.
You'll see i NEVER EVER run a single "normal" list. I have my own play style , and units that goes with it, and units i like (esthetically) And im deadly efficient at it.

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i wouldnt have 15 death dealers . I would have 15 steel tac arms ( but i dont )
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have a legal Red Blok playing list already
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have the useful heroes everyone likes ( but clearly i dont because i simply hate how they look)
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have a happy family of 3 baby toads
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i wouldnt have 3 defender snake and 3 defender cobra ( it doesnt even make sense!)

Lastly Cairnius , normally im nice and would be happy to entertain you. However your taste in how you get your daily jollies are pretty disgusting to me.

For anyone that is confused about whats going on with Cairnius i'll put it into warhammer terms.

Me: I love barrages! so much chaos and damage!
Cairnius: How many games have you played?
Me: I love barrages because they come from huge cannons!
Cairnius: You cant possibly like barrage because you havnt play the game enough.
So the only reason you like barrages is because other people told you to like it.

This is ridiculous.

LunaHound wrote:
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i wouldnt have 15 death dealers . I would have 15 steel tac arms ( but i dont )
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have a legal Red Blok playing list already
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have the useful heroes everyone likes ( but clearly i dont because i simply hate how they look)
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i would have a happy family of 3 baby toads
If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said , i wouldnt have 3 defender snake and 3 defender cobra ( it doesnt even make sense!)

Parrot eh. Squork Squork

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said, i wouldnt have 15 death dealers . I would have 15 steel tac arms ( but i dont )
I envy your Death Dealers, best looking model in the UNA infantry.

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said, i would have a legal Red Blok playing list already
You are beter off waiting for the boxsets and buying the units that dont get in it. You di this the right way around.

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said, i would have the useful heroes everyone likes ( but clearly i dont because I simply hate how they look)
No problem there, you got and therefore like how Newton looks though. You actually seen ther UNA codex, that girl is some form of mutant. I wonder if President Archer was assimilated by aliens before she got into politics.

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said, i would have a happy family of 3 baby toads
Still not too late, think about the poor lonely little Toad. Its abuse you know.

If i (parrot) what AT-43 players said, i wouldnt have 3 defender snake and 3 defender cobra ( it doesnt even make sense!)
Three Defender Snakes is a waste and dont make sense, but who cares between those and Death Dealers you can face anything. Now Defender Cobras on the other hand are LETHAL between the mortar and the missile you can deal with anything except *** infantry. In fact my other players found my one Cobra mortar borkan.

Orlanth wrote:

Saint Anuman wrote:Lunahound, Stick to your guns and find yor fun..LOL
Wondering if your into scenry building since you mentioned your a hobby fan...

Haywire- Good to see you fighting the good fight!

Saint Anumen, sorry but you are trying too hard.

Rackham zampolits are just what we dont need. There is no good fight to fight here, people either like a game they dont, they play a game or they dont. If I want to start into Warmachine or Infinity I dont feel I have to join a 'cult' to do so, why so with AT-43?

Besides Luna is a hobby fan already. Have you seen her Eldar armies pics, or her IG? There is no mysterious third degree on expanding to include AT-43 in games played.

ooh nice come back wipe your lips......Have no idea were your going, saying hello should be a issue but what ever if you guys need to stroke each others chocolate star fish go ahead have fun....

Saint Anuman wrote:Lunahound, Stick to your guns and find yor fun..LOL
Wondering if your into scenry building since you mentioned your a hobby fan...

Haywire- Good to see you fighting the good fight!

I have alot of interest in learning how to build scenaries ( i have alot of knowledge on it , but no experience )
I love painting , and to a degree converting.

However , there are a few factors on preventing me from touching my AT-43 minis.

Basically im scared to mess up their beautiful decals and camos ( in other words i cannot do better )
and my snow paste ran out ( i use that on everything!! ) and im told they only get stocked during christmas (oh no!!!!)

*Edit Im going to a craft store later today, hope i find some!!

Orlanth wrote: Rackham zampolits are just what we dont need. There is no good fight to fight here, people either like a game they dont, they play a game or they dont. If I want to start into Warmachine or Infinity I dont feel I have to join a 'cult' to do so, why so with AT-43?

Orlanth, you do not have to join a cult to play or enjoy AT-43. This is a misconception created by our friend Cairnius. He was under the perception that to become a Sentinel, he was only allowed to play AT-43. This is not true.

I enjoy the game very much. I play others as well. Heavy Gear, Charlie Company, and Space Hulk are examples of other games I play. I used to be POD CORPS (the Heavy Gear equivalent of a Rackham Sentinel). I am not a Sentinel because I did not think I knew enough about the rules, did not have the finances to purchase three armies (not because I had to, but to provide a good demo), and because Cairnius said he was going to be the one for our area.

Orlanth wrote:

Cairnius wrote:
I think any game is designed for people to have fun with it. Where Rackham is different is in their willingness to let people ignore the rules in the interests of having fun, or the company's willingness to make very significant rules changes (like allowing friendly troops to target other friendly troops with direct-fire weapons, an across-the-board rules change for the whole game) on the basis of a single question asked by a player on their forums in the interests of "fun."

Look sentinels, Cairnius is saying something nice about Rackham. i thought you were trying to tell us he is set on auto-bile and should not be given any time?

Please don't stereotype all of us. Cairnius did have some good ideas for the game during his time among us. I, for one, only had one real issue with him, but that is not for this place. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and debating is a good thing.

Orlanth wrote:However prepaint is not as cheap as some thought, China controls the induistry not Rackham, and they do know how to milk it. Rackham will begin to offer fairer prices we hope, with the introduction of assemblable kits.

Last I heard, the "assemblable [sic] kits" were scrapped due to resource issues.

Orlanth wrote:

Cairnius wrote:so if all you have are these Army Boxes, veteran players of AT-43 with deep collections will be able to construct armies specifically-designed to kill you very quickly - and considering how brutal the game is, that can be VERY quickly.

Same can be true of any game where you have an army tailored against you by a dick with all the models who knows what little you have. A decent player for any system should take that into account see you cannot custom your list and build a fair list. I have multiple preset low point starter lists fro all my armies and fleets, just pick up and play without someone fro a small game or against a small collection. When I say multiple I will roll d3 to select my list sometimes, especially if I host a game.

To add to these comments, Rackham has mentioned time and time again (on its forums) that the idea is directed at new business. By putting boxes containing similarly priced and, in their opinion, balanced armies into the boxes friends can all pick a favorite army, plunk down the $70.00, and have a pretty equal shot of winning a game. Their second purpose is to act as a spring board into a larger AT-43 collection, as has been mentioned by Cairnius. Privateer Press, Games Workshop, etc. have implemented similar structures into their products as well.

Orlanth wrote:

Cairnius wrote:
No one really talks about that much, which is surprising as it is a MAJOR difference to how people build armies in other games. In AT-43, you select the AP value for the game, figure out the mission and set up the terrain, and THEN compose your army.

Interesting, I would like to see if this is everyone elses experience. I would prefer against all comers lists at varying points band. Companies should fight with what they have got.

Yes, the game is set up so that the mission is chosen and then you build an army to the specified mission. Otherwise, there are certain faction builds that would not be able to win a mission if fielded. Is it fair to say that an army, a futuristic army nonetheless, would have advanced recon available to them? I am not sure I get Orlanth's point in regards to Cairnius observation here.

haywire wrote:

Orlanth wrote: Rackham zampolits are just what we dont need. There is no good fight to fight here, people either like a game they dont, they play a game or they dont. If I want to start into Warmachine or Infinity I dont feel I have to join a 'cult' to do so, why so with AT-43?

Orlanth, you do not have to join a cult to play or enjoy AT-43. This is a misconception created by our friend Cairnius. He was under the perception that to become a Sentinel, he was only allowed to play AT-43. This is not true.

I may be to blame for some of that mindset. I will tell you up front that I am adament about Rackham games. Numerous times he and I went around about where his energies as a Rackham Sentinel should be. To me, being a Rackham Sentinel is akin to being a 40k Rogue trader (or whatever they are called nowadays). Cairnius seemed like he wanted to trump up the game, but didn't want to dedicate any time to it and magically have people appear interested to play with him. The impression I, and many other Sentinels, got of him was that he wanted all of the perks without having to work for the benefits.

As an example of one of our conversations...

Blokhead wrote:

Cairnius wrote:That's pretty much what I've been trying to do at my club, but I can't do it every week. I have other games I want to play, and right now I have some terrain projects going which I want to finish...

Don't take this the wrong way (it is not a personal slam), but if one cannot be dedicated to Rackham, why should Rackham be dedicated to them?

Again, I BELIEVE, being a Sentinel means you do not take time away from scheduling events, running demos, etc. for Rackham games to partake in other games, and then complain there is no interest in Rackham games...it just seems odd to me...

Without quoting the entire thread (pick one), I can only elaborate so much...

Blokhead wrote:

Cairnius wrote:Don't take this the wrong way, either, but I think that's pretty unrealistic Blokhead.

And why is it unrealistic? You would never see Rogue Traders, Warlords, whatever the hell they are called nowdays promoting and playing other games. So, why should being a Sentinel be any different? I have a good friend who helped get PP off the ground. He didn't take away from his time promoting it to play any other game UNTIL he had a good PP "customer" base.

To you, dedication to Rackham may equate to only playing Rackham games. That's what it sounds like you're saying, anyway, and my apologies if I am not understanding you correctly.

Dedication: The act of dedicating or the state of being dedicated.

Dedicated: wholly committed to something, as to an ideal, political cause, or personal goal

Wholly:
1. entirely; totally; altogether; quite.
2. to the whole amount, extent, etc.
3. so as to comprise or involve all.

I hope you get my point...I am not discussing playing, but not taking the time away from demoing, putting together tournaments, etc. to play other games. i.e. IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO BE A SUCCESSFUL SENTINEL. (caps intended)

If I am correct...we have a fundamental disagreement on that point. I think dedication to Rackham means purchasing their products, putting the game on display sometimes but not all the time, being willing to answer questions about the game when someone approaches the table and they might otherwise be more inclined to tell them they would talk to them later because they're in the middle of a game.

We will agree to disagree then.

It means reaching out to find other, local area AT-43 players to try and gather them together to play games in visible settings to spur interest among other wargamers. It means suggesting projects for the Sentinel community like the Rulebook 1.5, or discussing demo systems, some of which will be valuable, others not - but it means taking the time to try and think of things to spur discussion.

Agreed, disagree (rulebook won't be redone until all armies are released, this isn't the responsibility of the Sentinels), and agreed (demos are wonderful).

I certainly don't do any of this with any of the other games I play.

You're not a representative for the company of those other games, though. You chose to become a Sentinel to represent Rackham, not those other games.

I'm a tabletop wargamer. I like tabletop wargames. No one game is superior to any other in my objective opinion. They all have their good and bad aspects. I think it is a strength, not a weakness, for any Sentinel to be in possession of this critical perspective. Otherwise, how can a Sentinel truly be aware of precisely which strengths to speak to when demo'ing AT-43?

I agree. All games have their good points and their down points. However, as a good salesman (which ALL Sentinels are) you must pitch your product as superior in all lights. Salesmen don't come up and tell you how their product is inferior, they point out only the best parts of the product.

Without that critical perspective sure, you can push "the company line," but a seasoned wargamer will pick that out in two seconds flat. I prefer to know from direct, and frequent experience, the fashions in which AT-43 may be superior to other games being able to use current examples of comparison to other games I currently play. It's like being able to speak their language...I read people on these forums talking about ToG very often making derisive statements about "the ToG does it this way, ha ha ha," and it's clear to me that these people haven't actively played ToG for at least two editions.

"Seasoned wargamer[s]" are like old people, difficult to change. Why put all your energy into converting when you can recruit fresh players? (serious question)

Why play a flawed system/game?

So, if these people are at a table demo'ing AT-43, and they make one of these comments, to a seasoned wargamer who plays ToG, this person making the demo just made a mistake. They may come off as just clueless. They may come off as a company schill, like a red shirt for ToG - and this turns discerning, critical gamers off.

"Know thy enemy." Got it.

This is not a mistake I would ever make, and I'm happy for it.

This whole train you are on has nothing to do with what you were originally describing. I was responding to your comment that you have other games you "want" to play. Sometimes we have to do things in life we don't want to do, in order to do the things we want to do. You need to make a decision as to what is more important to you, being a Sentinel or playing games.

We're part of a much larger industry, and I think it is particularly incumbent upon Sentinels to be aware of that industry. In the end - that means playing other games as well as AT-43.

Again, I won't disagree with you here. There is nothing wrong with playing other games, but telling us you want to be a Sentinel, then telling us you want to play other games and do other things, and then telling us you are having difficulty getting things going are all pretty indicative of the problem. We are trying to help you in getting to the root of the issue quicker, yet you are wanting to ignore the evidence.

This is the kind of Sentinel I am going to be. I cannot and will not apologize for it - and furthermore, again no offense, I'm not sure it's anyone's bailiwick other than Martin's to be disseminating what a Sentinel is or is not. You have your opinions and you are, of course, entitled and welcome to them - but please don't try to push them upon me or anyone else.

You can be the type of Sentinel you want to be. No one said you couldn't. But when others give you advice, and describe what you (probably) should be doing, don't give them gak for it. If you don't want to put the work in you will not get the rewards. Simple as that. I know nowadays that isn't the "typical" thought of American youth, but it still rings true. Anything worth having is worth working for.

EDIT:--------------------------

I'm clearly new at the Sentinel bit, and so have questions...sometimes it sounds like what some of you are talking about is straight-up salesmanship. I tend to think that good products sell themselves, which is why I'm reticent to become an unpaid salesperson. The harder you have to push a product, the worse it is for the future I feel.

Honestly, we know you are new. It does seem that you are new to doing this sort of thing for ANY gaming system, though. As mentioned above, it is salesmanship.

Is this idea of unpaid salesperson supposed to be the impression I am getting from people? Just playing a game around people so they can see it is one thing. Actively soliciting them to spend their money on it, that's something else...and a line I don't feel comfortable crossing. Decisions like these mean more, and tend to result in more consistent, future results, if people make them on their own.

I think you have picked up a bias against salesmanship somewhere. Maybe you had a friend or someone at your LGS really push you to try something. Introducing the product, shedding a good light on it, and then slowly (and subtly) dropping hints about purchasing the product go a lot longer way than just showing it off. Think about commercials: not only do they present a product to you, they show you WHY you should buy it, and the results of such a purchase.

I think good games sell themselves. My friend and I pioneered FoW into my club the way I'm trying to pioneer AT-43, and we did pretty much no work and now FoW is becoming a huge presence there. The game sold itself, and only after we played a few times with primed models using construction paper terrain.

The comment about good products selling themselves doesn't fly in our modern world: advertising is required to sell anything anymore.

Sometimes I wonder if FoW is responsible for my difficulties with AT-43...wouldn't that be bloody ironic? Torpedoed my own boat before it set sail? LOL

What did you do for FoW?

If the only time he had in a week to be at the gaming store was on his Flames of War game night, and this happened to also be the only time he had to demo AT-43, it seemed like his being a Rackham Sentinel took a back seat to Flames of War game night. Hey, I have no problem with that...unless the individual is asking the Sentinels how to trump up interest in the game (the purpose of the two quoted passages above), and then when given different options (tournaments, persistence at the LGS, etc.) declines them because they don't fit into his occasional desire to demo. It was no wonder he couldn't get AT-43 off the ground.

It seems as though he wanted the perks of being a Sentinel without having to put any effort into it. I would say this was my biggest bone of contention with him (and it should be pretty apparent in the conversation above). As I stated above (way up there), Cairnius had good ideas for the game, many ideas that others (Sentinels and non-Sentinels alike) had come up with in the past, and a few that were unique to him. It is a shame it ended the way it did.

I will end with this: I used to "work" for that clicky company by play-testing their games. I also was an adamant 40k player (back in the day). I just grew tired of "first turn" victories and sought out something new. I have nothing against any other gaming system, but as a Rackham Sentinel I believe my duties and loyalties should be to Rackham.

There is quite a bit that was left out (these snippets were from a 3-page thread) from other forum members. The bulk of my conversation with Cairnius pretty much followed the same line as above, with neither of us being willing to budge on our beliefs. I hope I have not broken any forum rules, and I only posted this so others may get insight into why Cairnius *may* have received the idea that in order to be a Rackham Sentinel one cannot play any other game.

haywire wrote:

Maybe I am wrong, but your posting style also seems to indicate that you are a "rules-lawyer".

...I did not say "YOU", I said "YOUR POSTING STYLE", and I am using correct the YOUR.

LOL!

So...you deny calling me a rules-lawyer by posting how you called me a rules-lawyer? The reason why you think I am a rules-lawyer (read:posting style) is irrelevant. I'm not sure you know what the term means, to be honest...


@ Orlanth

That doesn't really sound like an accurate description of combat drills to me. Issuing combat drills is pretty much a no-brainer, or ought to be. No one to shoot at? Overwatch. In cover? Take Cover. Got special weapons designed to shoot at something your primary weapons are not? Overwatch and Split Fire. In front of your other infantry units? Take A Knee.

If you're building your armies right, you should be making sure you have enough LP for all your units. I always figured two to three LP per infantry unit and never had a problem, even with Red Blok infantry-heavy armies. If you're playing against an army which drains your LP, you can account for that in your build, as well. Good AT-43 players build their lists to make sure they'll always have the LP they need...one of the nice things about the Easy-AT software is that it calculates total LP, your max LP wager for the Authority roll...

I think comparing AT-43 combat drills to BFG special orders isn't the best comparison...in BFG there are repercussions directly upon the unit receiving the order. Restrictions to movement, for example. In AT-43 you pay a resource to issue the drill, but again this usually isn't much of an issue.

I found AT-43 gameplay exceedingly simple once I got used to it compared to other systems. Maybe that's just me, and it's not a measure for anyone else...

Like I said, I find list-building to be just as important a determinant in AT-43 than in 40K. The fact that you can build the list as your last action prior to the beginning of gameplay really plays to that.

I'm not sure what you are asking me about the superior reserve rules in AT-43 because I don't think they are superior, just different. In 40K it's about what you want to hold back to make an impact later in the game, like I held back a Vindicator last night in a match against Deathwing because I knew that it could wipe out large amounts of Termies with single shots, and it late game after I'd whittled down the Termie squads that screw with my opponent more. Or it's about not starting anything on the table when you don't go first so as not to set up a shooting gallery for your opponent.

In AT-43, you always have to account for potentially not getting those reinforcements on the table, as a good opponent may work to deny you those troops. These reinforcement rules may be good sometimes, may suck other times. It depends. Personally, I prefer knowing that I will always get my reserves in, but I won't say it is necessarily a weakness of AT-43 that it is different.

That quote about Rackham changing rules actually wasn't meant as something nice to say about Rackham...I actually think lack of rules integrity is a serious problem. If you want to change a rule, fine - but have a good reason for it. Justify it. Rackham doesn't do that. They justify any changes with "You should just have fun," and I suppose for some people changing the rules is fine - but I would be ripshit if suddenly someone changed basic 40K gameplay rules when I had learned how to play it one way, and now had to account for a major change because one person asked a question online.

The new direct-fire rules, for example, provide extremely-cheap ways to get around Stealthed units. Just put them in-between two of your own units, and shoot at your own unit. Now Stealthed units have to take an extra LP out of the pool for Take A Knee drills to prevent this sort of abuse...

I don't think packaging is responsible for the high prices, Orlanth. I think Rackham is slightly delusional with their pricing policies. Look at Operation Damocles - $80 MSRP. The Heroscape basic set is $50, comes with better terrain, has better-quality pre-paints, yes it lacks two vehicles but they account for $30?

Look at their new Rush 'n' Crush game. $50 and it has no minis - it's a preposterous price.

I don't care what anyone says, when you have to file for bankruptcy protections and re-organize it means you weren't running your business well and couldn't remain solvent. Pricing has to play into that somehow. Tons of people jumped into AT-43 when the internet firesales took place. I never would have bothered trying the game at even the 25% off MSRP that The War Store offers because you still aren't getting good value for your money IMHO. Then again, I hardly purchase Star Wars figures anymore, either, because they're too expensive.

In terms of how people build their armies as the last step in game prep, in every game I ever played against an AT-43 vet that is how it went down. I played a game with Haywire and two other vets and Haywire and one of the other vets were crunching their lists right there at the table. I was absolutely astounded that people didn't have their lists ready to go, but then I learned that this is just how AT-43 works. *shrug*

Again, it's not necessarily a criticism...but if people want to start talking about how "tactical" or "strategic" one game is versus a different one...blind lists force adaptability as your list may not be tailored to the mission at hand, or the opponent you are facing. All of that is absent from AT-43 unless you agree to start using blind lists.

Saint Anuman wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Saint Anuman wrote:Lunahound, Stick to your guns and find yor fun..LOL
Wondering if your into scenry building since you mentioned your a hobby fan...

Haywire- Good to see you fighting the good fight!

Saint Anumen, sorry but you are trying too hard.

Rackham zampolits are just what we dont need. There is no good fight to fight here, people either like a game they dont, they play a game or they dont. If I want to start into Warmachine or Infinity I dont feel I have to join a 'cult' to do so, why so with AT-43?

Besides Luna is a hobby fan already. Have you seen her Eldar armies pics, or her IG? There is no mysterious third degree on expanding to include AT-43 in games played.

ooh nice come back wipe your lips......Have no idea were your going, saying hello should be a issue but what ever if you guys need to stroke each others chocolate star fish go ahead have fun....

Hey mind your language, my comments are fair. Luna with several armies and 4k posts to her credit is not a gaming hobbyist noob. I am seeing a lot of syrupy sweet overdone 'encouragement' intersperced with rabid attacks on critics. Adding the two together does not look good, and when I comment on that I am lumped into the same shark cage as Cairnius. Give me a chance to decide I dont like At-43 before pronouncing me a vile heretic. "The AT-43 blast rules suck." Now you can start!

haywire wrote:Orlanth, you do not have to join a cult to play or enjoy AT-43. This is a misconception created by our friend Cairnius. He was under the perception that to become a Sentinel, he was only allowed to play AT-43. This is not true.

I enjoy the game very much. I play others as well. Heavy Gear, Charlie Company, and Space Hulk are examples of other games I play. I used to be POD CORPS (the Heavy Gear equivalent of a Rackham Sentinel). I am not a Sentinel because I did not think I knew enough about the rules, did not have the finances to purchase three armies (not because I had to, but to provide a good demo), and because Cairnius said he was going to be the one for our area.

Cult, no...but Haywire, you were one of the loudest admonishers that I wasn't doing enough to find fellow AT-43 players because I didn't want to put on demos at local conventions, because I wasn't willing to drive outrageous distances to find opponents...the amount of work you would have had me do, which is something you are willing to do because you're a rabid AT-43 fan and that's fine, was like becoming an unpaid employee of Rackham Entertainment, which is madness. I have a life, man. If someone wants me to do marketing work for them they'd better bloody well pay me. Time is money.

You should totally become the local Sentinel, Haywire. You were into the game long before I was, and you clearly have the enthusiasm. The void is there, so fill it. I am sure you would be a very, very welcome member of their ranks, and I think they'd be right to be happy to have you in there.


@ Luna -

My issue with you answering questions about the gameplay is that you don't know anything about the gameplay yet. Don't take a statement of fact personally, and hopefully you will correct this soon and then be able to talk about how the rules actually function.

Rules on paper are one thing - if you've been playing tabletop wargames long enough you are very well aware that a rule which looks really good in a rulebook or Codex can turn out to be all sorts of screwed up on the table in play. You'll have to decide which, if any, of the AT-43 rules fall into that category, but right now you know theory, and not practice, and you can only provide valuable information once you know practice.

I said you were parroting because I did precisely what you did at the beginning. "AT-43 is fast-paced and brutal! AT-43 has this rule and that rule," because I had read about it online and on the AT-43 forums...but I didn't really know from personal experience yet. It's okay, I was there also - but that's what I mean by parroting. You're saying what you're reading about the game right now because that's all you have to go on, and you're trying to get people excited about the game here on Dakka Dakka.

Also, after the PMs you sent me which I found extremely rude, I wouldn't go casting aspersions on how someone else gets their jollies.

Saint Anuman wrote:ooh nice come back wipe your lips......Have no idea were your going, saying hello should be a issue but what ever if you guys need to stroke each others chocolate star fish go ahead have fun....

...

You're not the most eloquent writer, Saint. Considering you are a store owner, you also might want to exercise a little decorum. I would hate for anyone to think that when they head up to Adler Hobby in NH that the owner might be someone who would heap crass abuse on the customers.

Blokhead wrote:Last I heard, the "assemblable [sic] kits" were scrapped due to resource issues.

But there IS the Rackham Legends Grim Golem Overseer, which I was really looking forward to painting before I sold the Therian army...and isn't the new Francesca mercenary mini also a "to be painted" mini?

It's not much, but it's a start...Rackham would be very smart to keep these coming.

Cairnius wrote:

Blokhead wrote:Last I heard, the "assemblable [sic] kits" were scrapped due to resource issues.

But there IS the Rackham Legends Grim Golem Overseer, which I was really looking forward to painting before I sold the Therian army...and isn't the new Francesca mercenary mini also a "to be painted" mini?

It's not much, but it's a start...Rackham would be very smart to keep these coming.

Yes. So far there are the two miniatures you have mentioned for AT-43 (Francesca Fortuna and the Grim Golem Overseer) and four for Confrontation: The Age of the Rag'narok (Melmoth, Iraem, Brinkhz, and the Flesh Golem). The Rackham Legends line is a Resin line that has miniatures which need some assembling. I guess I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for reminding me. I was referencing a GW-style sprue-based kit (which was at one time in the works for some of the models, but has since been canceled).

Cairnius wrote:
I sincerely doubt that anyone from Rackham Entertainment cares much what anyone has to say on the AT-43 forums, short of when they are asked direct questions from the company. I have seen Rackham Sentinels, the people you would think RE would listen to above anyone else, complain bitterly about rules changes and no one at Rackham listens.

Cairnius wrote:
I think any game is designed for people to have fun with it. Where Rackham is different is in their willingness to let people ignore the rules in the interests of having fun, or the company's willingness to make very significant rules changes (like allowing friendly troops to target other friendly troops with direct-fire weapons, an across-the-board rules change for the whole game) on the basis of a single question asked by a player on their forums in the interests of "fun."

*Giggle , so i take it this rampage of yours to collapse Rakham's ivory tower comes from they didnt listen to your suggestions over the rest of other players. such childish tantrum .

OK... now I am pissed.

Cairnius wrote:
Cult, no...but Haywire, you were one of the loudest admonishers that I wasn't doing enough to find fellow AT-43 players because I didn't want to put on demos...

Let us state the truth and end the statement right there. The rest is just useless excuses.

Cairnius, you SAT on YOUR FAT ASS at Pandemonium Games and cried "No one will play AT-43 with me" like a fricken baby. I gave you suggestions on how to meet other people inside and out the Boston Area. But you REFUSED to move away from your Arvard Ardboy Crew. Fine, they were not interested. Move on!

And again you cried like a fricken baby. "I can't drive 20 minutes to Waltham! Boo Hoo! I can't take the T to Malden. Boo Hoo! I would not be caught dead in Somerville."

You say I demand too much. I say you have not even lifted a finger and dish out excuses.

Excuses! That is all that you are full of.

I drove an hour and paid fricken Mass Pike Tolls to help you. You did not even really want to play, you were too busy with your Ardvard Ardboys! I have tried to be patient with you, tried to help you, and you have no respect for that at all. In fact, you constantly throw my help back in my face.

All you have done is cry and complain.

I do not have to drive to Hollis, NH or Boston, I have players right here. I do it because I can and I want to meet other players.

I will not play AT-43 or ANY GAME with you because I am afraid to be associated with such a fething CRY BABY! I am completely done with you.

Haywire , this is pretty self explanatory , dont be mad over it:

Cairnius wrote:Ah.
On that score...being a Sentinel isn't actually something hard to do. You just ask to become one, and they let you in. So, if you were thinking that there was some modicum of effort that went into my becoming a Sentinel which then would make my turning my back on them seem odd, there's no effort going in, so there's no loss of investment going out, if that makes sense to you.

They pretty much give Sentinel-dom away like candy. You could go become a Sentinel in a day or two, most likely, and get early access to the Cog Army Book, see pictures of the models going into the Army Boxes, etc.

Not everyone joined sentinel to help ,certain individual have their own agenda.

@ Saint Anuman: While I respect your being one of the first people to raise awareness of AT-43 on the forum, I honestly think that's more than a bit unfair on Orlanth. As I have said before: there are two discussions going on - one is a discussion of the the game itself and the rules on an expanded tabletop basis, the other is about how everybody feels about Rackham. Orlanth has consistantly talked about rules.

@ Lunahound: Nice collection. The bases really do add to it. That's one of the biggest draws of AT-43; the immediate visual impact is very impressive. You get your box, open it up, lay out all your troops out and assuming you have all the relevant Rulebooks, you're ready to play. And that's the thing, at least for me, minor rules issues aside - I look at the models, appreciate the aesthetic, and really want to see them in action on the battlefield. I always clean up the paint-jobs, but am glad of the base coat.

What the heck? I thought the rudeness was confined to the 40k forums...

Keep it civil, folks. Click on Rule #1 in my sig for a review of the Dakka rules; a few of you seem to need it.

Blokhead wrote:

Cairnius wrote:

Blokhead wrote:Last I heard, the "assemblable [sic] kits" were scrapped due to resource issues.

But there IS the Rackham Legends Grim Golem Overseer, which I was really looking forward to painting before I sold the Therian army...and isn't the new Francesca mercenary mini also a "to be painted" mini?

It's not much, but it's a start...Rackham would be very smart to keep these coming.

Yes. So far there are the two miniatures you have mentioned for AT-43 (Francesca Fortuna and the Grim Golem Overseer) and four for Confrontation: The Age of the Rag'narok (Melmoth, Iraem, Brinkhz, and the Flesh Golem). The Rackham Legends line is a Resin line that has miniatures which need some assembling. I guess I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for reminding me. I was referencing a GW-style sprue-based kit (which was at one time in the works for some of the models, but has since been canceled).

I get the impression that the Grim Golem oversseer is resin because there not enough variety in a Grim Golem unit to make it worthwhile producing an attachment boxset.

What we need is not so much more resin but more cards, in particular generic officers in vehicles. You can have from sgt to colonel or equivalent in some infantry squads, but you cannot have a strider commander unless it is a tooled up special character. Stark is great but he can be a crutch if I use him in every game. I would like to see various vehicles get various officers, you dont have to open up every officer for every vehicle, just a good mix. so you could get a Wraith Golgoth omicron, an Incubus Golgoth Sigma and a Poltergeist Golgoth Delta as alternate force leaders, not heroes just leaders.

Sorry, please explain again/elaborat, after going over it three times I still have problems understanding what you mean.

haywire wrote:OK... now I am pissed.

Having met you in person before, this doesn't have much impact.

Never take your standards of what does or does not constitute a reasonable use of time and impose it on someone else. You may not be married, or may not have a boyfriend or girlfriend; you may not have a busy social schedule, or lots of other, different hobbies and activities. Going all over creation to do demos at conventions to find new AT-43 players and driving to another state just to get games in may work for you, but don't assume everyone has that sort of time on their hands. I'm glad I don't, quite frankly.

I'm sorry that you discount the social aspect of gaming, i.e. making a whole bunch of friends who all meet together in one place once a week to game, but that's the most important part of gaming to me, more important than any single gaming system, and what you suggested to me was nothing short of changing my entire gaming routine strictly for a single game.

That's insanity. No game is that good. Furthermore, any game which WAS that good probably wouldn't have such a sparse fanbase so as to require changing an entire routine just to find people to play it with.


@ Luna -

You can believe what you want based on what the Sentinels are telling you about me, but if ad hom attacks are all you are left with in this conversation you may want to pay attention to Iorek's admonition. And please, for the love of God, stop PM'ing me. I'm not interested in talking with you privately.


@ Orlanth -

Rackham could have made a Grim Golem Attachment Box with Overseer, two Flamer Grims, and three regular Grim Golems to enable you to run a full squad with one Unit box and one Attachment box. It doesn't need to be about variety of weapons, it could be about running WYSIWYG squads...

The early releases were not smart in how they packaged the minis, but to their credit Rackham has learned from this. You still need to pay almost $90 to run a full unit of Star Troopers for UNA in any potential configuration, but not many people take Combat Engineers or Flamers so they put those in one Attachment box and put the more popular choices, Medics and Volcano MG's, into another Attachment box. Now you can run the most likely Star Troopers unit for a 1/3 of the old cost.

Karman players have better Attachment box setups as well from what I hear (Karmans were the one army I didn't get, so I cannot say from experience but so many people say that Karman mini boxes are a vast improvement that I have to imagine that's the case).


@ Blokhead -

I can't honestly say that I am embarrassed that you posted up that dialogue from another forum, though I think it's considered bad form to do so online...but it was a fair exchange and at least we remained polite - but you omitted the most important part of that conversation - my response to your question "What did you do for Flames of War?"

The answer: nothing. I didn't have to, because it is a GREAT game. It sold itself - which was part of my overall point. The more I was asked to SELL AT-43, the more I had to ask myself "Why does it need selling? Flames of War didn't."

It's "soft sell" versus "hard sell." Sometimes "salesmanship" is just making someone aware of a product, and then it is such a good product that people look into it themselves. The "salesmanship" is in merely making someone aware of the product's existence, which is what I did. The "hard sell" is trying to convince someone to purchase the item, and I do have a prejudice against this because I know how I react, personally, to the hard sell - pretty much instant revulsion and immediate distrust. If the product was good, no one would have to try so hard to convince me.

The hobby aspects that 40K and FoW have in common certainly must have a lot to do with why FoW is more popular than AT-43...but perhaps that speaks to what a tabletop wargame actually is, i.e. not just gameplay, but also a hobby. AT-43 isn't a hobby, it's only a game - and so perhaps, as I've said, Rackham did themselves a disservice by trying to market AT-43 as a tabletop wargame, and should have marketed it as a boardgame with much higher-quality minis than one normally gets with a boardgame. With gaming tiles and posters, it sure feels like a boardgame...and imagine the market that gets opened up there. Sell in Toys R Us right next to Risk and Heroscape. Corner the little kid market. Make a cartoon. Some comic books.

The fact that so many avid AT-43 players bring the hobby aspect into the game is a very good proof, I think, that validates my feelings on what a tabletop wargame actually is, and how AT-43 really isn't one. If I made any mistake in my review, it may have been even trying to justify AT-43 as a "hybrid" game. Maybe it is actually a boardgame...but so what? I like boardgames - and if AT-43 was marketed and sold as such, I can tell you that my opinion of the game would be much, much more positive.

Part of what may sink AT-43 is aiming for the wrong audience, I think. AT-43 is more like Space Hulk than 40K, but Space Hulk is considered by many to be one of the best products if not the best product Games Workshop ever created...there's wisdom in Rackham considering this approach.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:Sorry, please explain again/elaborat, after going over it three times I still have problems understanding what you mean.

Me? Or someone else. In case it was me I edited my above post for typos and cleared it a bit.

Cairnius wrote:
@ Orlanth

<snip>

Thankyou for this reply. It is a quality assessment of the game system that I can see a lot of sense with. it is a pity not everyone reads you the same way. Most of my comments below are about amendments additions and clarifications to this post, which I largely agree with.

Cairnius wrote:
That doesn't really sound like an accurate description of combat drills to me. Issuing combat drills is pretty much a no-brainer, or ought to be. No one to shoot at? Overwatch. In cover? Take Cover. Got special weapons designed to shoot at something your primary weapons are not? Overwatch and Split Fire. In front of your other infantry units? Take A Knee.

Point. I had noticed that I had enough LP to do all the obvious with every unit every turn. Baring Interference combined with early loss of my general and a lot of my sgts/relays I cannot see how I can be left with insufficient LP to have to make hard choices. There really should not be enough LP to go around, only this way do orders and routines become truly tactical.
I have thought whether fewer LP should be given for officers, or officers made a lot more expensive. Colonels/Saints/Omegas seem too cheap to me. I would still buy one for 200pts basic for the Lp and authority bonus. At that level of price officers would be something you need to mull over, how many and what grade do you take. top level commanders are a no brainer even in low points lists.
the alternate fix would be to get one LP for every two units and leave officers alone. This would mean no messing with points costs - which I am loath to touch without a very strong concensus or a complete fan rewrite.
Halving the base number of points would make every LP decison one you have to think about strongly. As it is even accross the board it should be fair, it will even alleviate Karmansd problems as the commanders LP will be a geater percentage of the whole so they are proportionally far less behind the other races in LP than they currently are.
One balance to that, and one that keeps in tune with how soldiers think and do: If you have knee to the ground of take cover orders and you completely forfeit your actuivation of your own free will you can maintain those orders for free. This mean you can still maintain everyone in cover if they all take cover and you only actuivate the soldeirs you can effectivelty command. This is not unreasonable , having half your army unable to take cover in the same trecnh doesnt make sense, having half your army paralysed in the trenches not daring to raise their herads and confusion being a problem if they do; well that does make sense.

Cairnius wrote:
I think comparing AT-43 combat drills to BFG special orders isn't the best comparison...in BFG there are repercussions directly upon the unit receiving the order. Restrictions to movement, for example. In AT-43 you pay a resource to issue the drill, but again this usually isn't much of an issue.

Battlefleet Gothic is a genuine high quality gaming system, by far the best miniatures ruleset GW has made. Andy Chambers knew his stuff.

Cairnius wrote:
I'm not sure what you are asking me about the superior reserve rules in AT-43 because I don't think they are superior, just different. In 40K it's about what you want to hold back to make an impact later in the game, like I held back a Vindicator last night in a match against Deathwing because I knew that it could wipe out large amounts of Termies with single shots, and it late game after I'd whittled down the Termie squads that screw with my opponent more. Or it's about not starting anything on the table when you don't go first so as not to set up a shooting gallery for your opponent.

Here I think you are wrong Cairnius. 40k reserves, they come on at random, you cant hold them back and its all based on one or two dice at the beginning of a turn. Those few dice rolls dominate the game. At least you can move your tanks on and shoot first turn. The old rules meant you could not shoot a Whirlwind until turn 4 of a 4-6 turn game. not worth it in 'ecalation' probably not. Yes things have changed but GW has a habit of only part fixing a rules edition.

Cairnius wrote:
In AT-43, you always have to account for potentially not getting those reinforcements on the table, as a good opponent may work to deny you those troops. These reinforcement rules may be good sometimes, may suck other times. It depends. Personally, I prefer knowing that I will always get my reserves in, but I won't say it is necessarily a weakness of AT-43 that it is different.

Good it then becomes a case of your opponent using his tactical skill to limit your reserves. in 40k you might do this with a character but the only cerebral component of this is decifing whether to take that character, you cannot normally play to a situation where reserve rolls are modified by actions. Rackham got this bit right.

Cairnius wrote:
Rackham doesn't do that. They justify any changes with "You should just have fun," and I suppose for some people changing the rules is fine

GW has the same bugbear, and uses ther same excuse to paint over holes in the system that could be fixed with a few lines of code. Its not right when GW do it, its not right when Rackham do it.

Cairnius wrote:
The new direct-fire rules, for example, provide extremely-cheap ways to get around Stealthed units. Just put them in-between two of your own units, and shoot at your own unit. Now Stealthed units have to take an extra LP out of the pool for Take A Knee drills to prevent this sort of abuse...

Abuse, up to a point. This is workable for blast artillery, i would not allow it for direct fire, as far as the soldiers are concerned they are shooting their own men. it is synonymous to a mobile version of calling artillery down on your position. if you call artillery down on yourself while being overun the shells come in very accurately and quickly, with no further ranging required. Its a suicide move.
Doing this on the run with artillery is not impossible, but its a move I would restrict to fanatic suicide troops. Doing this direct fire should be not allowed.

Cairnius wrote:
I don't think packaging is responsible for the high prices, Orlanth. I think Rackham is slightly delusional with their pricing policies. Look at Operation Damocles - $80 MSRP. The Heroscape basic set is $50, comes with better terrain, has better-quality pre-paints, yes it lacks two vehicles but they account for $30?

Heroscape is marketed as a mainstream toy, its catchment market is way larger than Rackhams which is firmly in the wargaming hobbyist sustrata.

Cairnius wrote:
I don't care what anyone says, when you have to file for bankruptcy protections and re-organize it means you weren't running your business well and couldn't remain solvent. Pricing has to play into that somehow. Tons of people jumped into AT-43 when the internet firesales took place.

Yes it could be whistling while drowning, but on the other hand these were issues of the past. A companty filing for bankruptcy provision has to change its board. The new underwriters have to approve the new business plan, thus changes would have been made,. Rackham Entertainment is showing us this with the loss leaders, I expect this was part of the agreed business model change that occured during ther rescue. as Rackham Entertainment is coming through with their business plan with the materialising Army box deals I think it fair to say bankruptcy was a past not a current issue.
Yes Rackham must tread carefully, yes Rackham must minimise mistakes and attract greater revenue, but there will be a reaonable turn around time set up for them to do this and the army boxes appear to be more or less on schedule, so I am hopeful.

Cairnius wrote:
In terms of how people build their armies as the last step in game prep, in every game I ever played against an AT-43 vet that is how it went down. I played a game with Haywire and two other vets and Haywire and one of the other vets were crunching their lists right there at the table. I was absolutely astounded that people didn't have their lists ready to go, but then I learned that this is just how AT-43 works. *shrug*

Again, it's not necessarily a criticism...but if people want to start talking about how "tactical" or "strategic" one game is versus a different one...blind lists force adaptability as your list may not be tailored to the mission at hand, or the opponent you are facing. All of that is absent from AT-43 unless you agree to start using blind lists.

After asking around I have little problem with this when using ther set scenarios, as force sizes change. But we also want to move on to open fields objective point allocation and standard tabletop game setups preferavbly with larger armies (see other thread). With these we need flexibility for the inclusion of prior made lists.

If I quote that whole thing this will get really long, so I'll respond in order where I have responses...

GW fixed Reserves a lot, IMHO, by making them automatically come in at a certain point. I have had AT-43 games where some reserves never made it in. It may have been that the reserve units I had were too large a points-value such that I didn't get to earn enough, and then I tried to make my reserve units smaller values...but sometimes that didn't matter. It really galled me that certain units just never got on, the same way it used to gall me when that Drop Pod filled with troops just never hit the table.

The good thing about the way AT-43 handles reserves is that it gives you reason to go for Secondary Objectives right away...but this might be a double-edged sword. It also means you can predict, to some degree, where the enemy is going in early turns.

I don't think GW has quite the same bugbear. When they change rules, they do so through official FAQ, and then they stay that way for right or wrong until the next FAQ, and they don't come that often. I can deal with that. I can't deal with "official" changes made with no fanfare or official notice that I have to dig for.

Point about Heroscape and what it is - but my point is that AT-43 could be the same thing. I don't think it necessarily belongs in the genre of "tabletop wargame." It might do better if it weren't. Imagine selling to the audience who buys Heroscape but with the kind of game universe AT-43 has. I dunno, I've had friends suggest the idea and it always sounded like a very marketable idea to me.

I agree that the Army Boxes were a good next step, but I think a lot is riding on them...and I still think they should have shored up the rulebook with something like a free pdf of a version 1.5 or something which fixes translations, and adds in some of the officially-FAQ'ed clarifications such that the new players start their experience with the game in a better place than you or I did. I can't see how it would cost that much, and they give the rules away already for free so it's not like they'd be interrupting a revenue stream.

Cairnius wrote:
@ Luna -
You can believe what you want based on what the Sentinels are telling you about me, but if ad hom attacks are all you are left with in this conversation you may want to pay attention to Iorek's admonition. And please, for the love of God, stop PM'ing me. I'm not interested in talking with you privately.

No silly boy , these are quoted directly from you. I dont need to ask sentinels about you, trust me. ( infact i still trust your words hence why i bothered to pm you with questions )

Are you high? stop pming you? last time we had any convo with you was 5 days ago.

Seriously, so more PMs and the ad hom posts. You're not adding anything to this, especially when Orlanth and I get decent exchanges going and you chime in with uselessness like that...so much of the drama around the discussions of AT-43 are people discussing me, personally, and not the game and my comments about it. Grow up.

Cairnius wrote:Seriously, so more PMs and the ad hom posts. You're not adding anything to this, especially when Orlanth and I get decent exchanges going and you chime in with uselessness like that...so much of the drama around the discussions of AT-43 are people discussing me, personally, and not the game and my comments about it. Grow up.

No you see, here is what you are good at and what you have been doing.

You claim to discuss things with Orlanth ( which you are , nice! ) , then hide a few lines of flame bait directed to me ( yep ).

I answer to your flame baits like just now, you whine and rant claiming im playing foul.

Ppl arnt blind you know . I dont remember inviting you to discuss anything in this thread either.
See in this thread we discuss . review the game and models and books . Not discussing rules.

You want to discuss , or should i say diss the rules , thats fine! however ... I believe you already have 2 active thread on it.

Good day Cairnius . Nothing more to be said to you.

Lunahound, thanks for the wonderful pic of your armies and the brief review

I am definitely looking to try this game out, too, mainly from the posts I've seen on Dakka. Thanks!!

Luna - stop with the drama. I didn't ask you to discuss anything in any thread I've ever written...does that mean you weren't entitled to post in there?

You came after me, PM'ing me about whether I was "honorable" or not, asking me to "justify" who I was to say what I say until I finally had to ask you to stop PM'ing me.
Let's call a spade a spade.

If you can't handle someone commenting on your posts, don't comment on theirs - you were quite fine with questioning my motives and my conduct, and then proceeded to harass me...no matter what you may think of my conduct, yours has been deplorable. I sincerely hope you have nothing more to say to or about me for the rest of the time I'm on Dakka Dakka...is that a promise? I'll take silence as agreement...

Cairnius wrote:Luna - I know you want the last word and all, but you make no sense. I didn't ask you to discuss anything in any thread I've ever written...does that mean you weren't entitled to post in there? Does the TC decide who does and doesn't post?

You came after me, PM'ing me about whether I was "honorable" or not, asking me to "justify" who I was to say what I say until I finally had to ask you to stop PM'ing me.
Let's call a spade a spade.

If you can't handle someone commenting on your post, don't comment on theirs - you were quite fine with questioning my motives and my conduct - if you can't stand someone responding to the substance of your posts and not the person posting them...

Did you not see my last quote ? Read.

Last word? i can care less who get the last word. I sure dont get jollies from it. Im curious about something , i 'll ask.

You have something to ask me , i'll reply.
You accuse me of something i didnt do , i'll retort.

Is that understandable? It really is not that complicated.

You want to diss the game, thats fine. You have 2 threads on it already. This thread can do fine without your help thank you.
This isnt about last word . im just so very tired of answering to you. I mean , i get so tired from just answering you on dakka alone.

I cant begin to imagine what duncan and other sentinels go through on the other multiple wargame boards with you.

You want last words? thats fine with me. So here is something . Lets stay out of each others threads , i already took the first step and stopped posting on yours long ago even though i still have tons of questions.
But its ok , i took the effort and made account on main at-43 board , i will ask all my future questions there.

Now its your move .

This thread is being locked because the topic is no longer being discussed.