Main
Registration
Login
Welcome Guest

RSS
 
[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 1 of 11
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » Flamer template AT-43
Flamer template AT-43
Should we use the WH40K flamer template in AT-43. To stop overhead shooting.
1.No, the rules are okay.[ 5 ][62.50%]
2.Yes, flamers should not shoot overhead.[ 3 ][37.50%]
3.Don't care either way.[ 0 ][0.00%]
4.Other opinion (please specify)[ 0 ][0.00%]
Poll has expired - Sunday, 11-Sep-2011, 7:09 PM
Answers total: 8
zellakDate: Sunday, 28-Aug-2011, 7:09 PM | Message # 1
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
There are some who do not mind the rule for flamers in AT-43.

And some who think they are wrong.

A flamer is a short range weapon that fires a jet of flaming liquid.
Which would be far to dangerous to shoot, if the firer had friendlies to his front.

DEMON : " When next we meet, i shall tear you limb from limb...there will be no escape. "

Hero: " You bring balloon animals and i'll hire a clown..... we can make it a regular party. "
 
BanksiDate: Sunday, 28-Aug-2011, 7:56 PM | Message # 2
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation: 33
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)

A flamer is a short range weapon that fires a jet of flaming liquid.
Which would be far to dangerous to shoot, if the firer had friendlies to his front.



Unfortunately the rules and text in AT43 read differently, perhaps we should rename it instead to ball of burny stuff thrower!!
biggrin

Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
 
BalrogDate: Sunday, 28-Aug-2011, 8:17 PM | Message # 3
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hey Z ... I think the main point of AT-43 as a futuristic warfare game is being totally missed, so weapons are more advanced than flame throwers as we know them now. On top of this, here's the descriptions for some of the factions who have "flamers" ...
    UNA description for flamers ...
    The U.N. flamer uses a highly flammable and long burning chemical mixture, sealed in a high-pressure air-tight canister.
    It projects balls of fire at enemy units. This weapon uses indirect fire rules.

    Karmen description for flamers ...
    Karman flamers generate a sphere of plasma inside a powerful magnetic field able to contain the unbelievable heat of the plasma.
    A bubble of plasma could char an entire unit: when it is freed from its envelope even the air around it ignites. This weapon uses indirect fire and projection rules.

    Red Blok description for flamers ...
    The Red Blok’s flamers use a rapid-combustion chemical mixture kept under high pressure to smother enemy units in a real firestorm.
    This weapon uses indirect fire rules.
... so in reality, ONLY Red Blok should be effected by this vote. The other factions list "flamers" firing balls of chemicals, no different than someone firing rockets or throwing grenades as indirect fire, which allows overhead fire.

And another point, if we're to question "flamers" that use "indirect fire", then we should question ALL weapons which use "indirect fire" and remove this rule across all weapons. Whether someone throws a grenade or fires a flamer, the effects are the same ... their able to shoot over troops. If your now saying we can't do it for one weapon type, then we should remove the "indirect fire" altogether!

There's too much analysis going on with "flamers" for my liking, and the main point that AT-43 is a futuristic time period when weapon development would be far beyound what we understand things is being totally missed! ... Walts


PS. If the vote goes against my Red Blok comrades, I will be happy to go with the majority! Like we've always said about rules in general ... "can't please all the plebs all the time!"
 
BanksiDate: Sunday, 28-Aug-2011, 9:14 PM | Message # 4
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation: 33
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
And another point, if we're to question "flamers" that use "indirect fire", then we should question ALL weapons which use "indirect fire" and remove this rule across all weapons. Whether someone throws a grenade or fires a flamer, the effects are the same ... their able to shoot over troops. If your now saying we can't do it for one weapon type, then we should remove the "indirect fire" altogeth


Hi Balrog,

Actually one of my best units depends on "indirect fire" , that all it does, it's mobile artillery a 460pt unit with 2 figures, so before you suggest getting rid of that rule perhaps you should see who and what it effects!!!

Is this another rule we are trying to change because it is too hard to understand or because it bugs someone?

Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
 
zellakDate: Monday, 29-Aug-2011, 4:48 PM | Message # 5
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
And another point, if we're to question "flamers" that use "indirect fire", then we should question ALL weapons which use "indirect fire" and remove this rule across all weapons. Whether someone throws a grenade or fires a flamer, the effects are the same ... their able to shoot over troops. If your now saying we can't do it for one weapon type, then we should remove the "indirect fire" altogether!


Complete nonsense !.....you might as well say remove all firing from AT-43 wacko

That would make about as much sense as your statement.

There is only one reason to change over to the WH40K template, it is more intuitive,(at least to anyone who knows how a flamer works).

DEMON : " When next we meet, i shall tear you limb from limb...there will be no escape. "

Hero: " You bring balloon animals and i'll hire a clown..... we can make it a regular party. "
 
pavlovDate: Monday, 29-Aug-2011, 6:11 PM | Message # 6
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Hi

I look on it like the Romans firing jars of oil/tar with catapults biggrin anyway I made some 4 inch templates at work today and they look rather nice much nicer than the evil empires scabby little flamer template which is smaller and way too narrow. I want to be able to chuck flame over containers etc and not have my opponent hide from the effect they become much more of an offensive weapon as opposed to defensive, it's just much better as indirect.

If you want to see a ball of plasma do the following

Take a cocktail stick and push it into a cork light the end of of the cocktail stick and place under a jar inside your microwave and switch on, there should be a ball of flame inside the jar this is a ball of plasma, if the the ball of plasma and fire is outside the microwave then the demonstation/experiment has failed big time and you should run ....yes run very fast biggrin

Seen this on the telly about 2 day ago, the ball of plasma not the running, the Max Planck university in Germany did it much better with no microwave involvement or running.

Thats how I realy imagine a Karman/Una/Red Blok flamer not that rubbish from ww1/ww2/40k something with a bit of style and French flair....just different and something to be scared of rather than a long streak of fiery stuff (I dont mean burning microwaves by the way).

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 30-Aug-2011, 0:48 AM | Message # 7
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (zellak)
Complete nonsense!

... Just like this poll!

Quote (zellak)
.....you might as well say remove all firing from AT-43

That would make about as much sense as your statement.

There is only one reason to change over to the WH40K template, it is more intuitive,(at least to anyone who knows how a flamer works).

My complaint is that this poll puts into question the whole "indirect fire" concept, not "all firing" as Z puts it, so whether "flamers", grenades or missile attacks, we're touching on the concept that overhead shooting is dangerous just for "flamers", so why not all weapons which use "indirect fire" ... and only that! Talk about missing the point of a statment!

AND, did u read the descriptions I posted for the factions which have flamers ... ONLY RED BLOK uses the same style of flame thrower as we know them now, and once again missing the point that AT-43 is a FUTURISTIC battlefield so our concept of flame throwers and all their defects should be ignored as FUTURISTIC "flamers" are bound to be much more effective, including their overhead shooting capabilites.

If I was to be totally honest, I'm not happy that attempting to adjust rules which effect only some of the factions is a 100% NO/NO in my book! If there was lack of clarity then I would understand, but when we start to nit-pick on each factions weapons and question what some can do and begin voting on "what people think" at every turn without being able to discuss it, then the "spirit of the game" is being poorly thought of ... Walts
 
zellakDate: Tuesday, 30-Aug-2011, 5:11 PM | Message # 8
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1543
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Lets just go with the one question per poll, and not open everything to discussion.

Clearly there is a majority who are happy with the rule as is, i believe in democracy and if its the opinion of most people that the rules for flamers should not change then thats okay with me. happy

I dont mind tweaking rules, and in this case it was really just to add realism.
I had no intention of changing rules in order to gain a game advantage. angry

There seems to be a lot of people taking this campaign very seriously.

DEMON : " When next we meet, i shall tear you limb from limb...there will be no escape. "

Hero: " You bring balloon animals and i'll hire a clown..... we can make it a regular party. "
 
BanksiDate: Tuesday, 30-Aug-2011, 9:59 PM | Message # 9
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation: 33
Status: Offline
Since us Karmans are the winningest team at the moment, I suppose we are taking it very seriously. Banana's all round boys!!! cool

Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
 
BalrogDate: Wednesday, 31-Aug-2011, 7:04 AM | Message # 10
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
@Zellak:
    Apologies for being a bit over the top with my previous statments, and I know that you would never tweak rules to gain a faction advantage, but I think there should have been a lot more research into the implications of this poll before it was placed in the forums. As too realism, AT-43 is a futuristic battleground, so any thoughts of realism have to be given a bigger dose of "Sci-Fi", I think.

    As you can now see, the implications of this poll only effect the Red Blok, so more care & thought are needed before we step into unknown waters again.
Poor Karman's ... too many banana's on the brain I think ... alco ... being in second place!

Our Red Blok boys are doing pretty well ... 55VP's and a sector under our wings, and right up those gorilla's asses, oh, errr Mrs'sss ... so I'm well chuffed too ... get the vodka out!!!


Added 31st Aug 2011:
    Big apology to the Karmans ... they are winning & number one because of the sectors they control! ... Sozzzzz Banksi!! shok
 
CheDate: Thursday, 01-Sep-2011, 7:57 PM | Message # 11
Lieutenant general
Group: Member
Messages: 528
Reputation: 61
Status: Offline
Quote (pavlov)
Max Planck


That's rhyming slang, but I forget what for tongue

Added (31-Aug-2011, 8:42 PM)
---------------------------------------------

Quote (Balrog)
Our Red Blok boys are doing pretty well ...


Not really. We only got into Mount Elysee 'cos no one else was around and we got more points in losing battles than in winners. Or is that my negative side coming out? unsure

Added (01-Sep-2011, 7:57 PM)
---------------------------------------------
If a ball of flaming liquid, plasma or whatever is thrown by whatever method surely if something or someone is in the way then they will be hit. I vote for the template and for the hell of it. happy


Wargamers like to paint their privates!!
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 20-Sep-2011, 2:42 PM | Message # 12
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Guys ... I see that the poll results of 5 to 3 for keeping the "flamers" is finished, so they stay as they are.

I'll put this with the inHouse game rules tonight and let everyone know ... Walts
 
CheDate: Tuesday, 20-Sep-2011, 8:10 PM | Message # 13
Lieutenant general
Group: Member
Messages: 528
Reputation: 61
Status: Offline
Quote (Che)
I vote for the template and for the hell of it.


But I also reserve the right to change my mind.

Wargamers like to paint their privates!!
 
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Rules, inHouse Rules & FAQs » Flamer template AT-43
Page 1 of 11
Search:

Copyright MyCorp © 2017