Main
Registration
Login
Welcome Guest

RSS
 
[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 4 of 4«1234
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Armies » Karman - vanilla list - support units (Karman core list errata)
Karman - vanilla list - support units
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 6:44 PM | Message # 61
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Quote (gerrywithaG)
Hi Walts,

Here's what you wrote just to refresh your memory

"Hi Guys

As you'll know, having caused Gerry to quit as the AT-43 umpire has caused everyone great distress. I've apologised to Gerry for my incessant ranting and have decided to no longer take part in ANY debates about AT-43. This includes debates on new unit types, armybooks, inHouse Rules and corebook tweaks.

I hope that by removing myself from any debates ... With me out of the debating picture, I'm sure you'll have calmer seas,

Walts"

________________________________________
Do you think you can stick to that please? As I'd rather not refer you to the moderator and ask to have you removed from posting on the At-43 side of things which would be a touch embarrassing to be honest

Cheers ... Gerry

Soz Gerry, did u not read my last post? I got bored and decided to change my mind. Of course, I change my mind on a weekly basis, maybe I'll go back under the bridge for a while! wink Now we both know that's a lie!!! I'm back on the "Rules As Written Forever!" bandwagon, again! Strangely enough, it always coincides with how much chocolate I get, and at the mo I'm getting loads with sorting odd PC's! Yummmmyyyyy biggrin I'm like a mental kid high on smarteases .... War On!!!!

As you will know, forums are open to all, and comments too, so don't post if you don't want my opinions. As z says ... "don't feed the troll!"

If you want to refer me to the Mod, don't worry about it. I won't take it personal. I know I'm rocking the boat again because I want the rules to go back to what they where written as ... R.A.W. Forever! ... and all the tweaks to be removed, imho, so that's simply a difference of opinions within our club, not a problem a Mod would even look into. I've been a Mod forever over a wide range of weird & wonderful websites and know the score. They'll simply ask me to respond to your complaint, to try and work things out with you, and then do nothing. To be honest, they'll most likely not even respond! So don't worry about making a complaint. I've lost track of the knocks against me across the globe ... the mods usually call me by my first name now! ... Walts
 
pavlovDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 7:32 PM | Message # 62
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Edit
Message edited by pavlov - Thursday, 17-May-2012, 5:06 PM

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
gerrywithaGDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 8:11 PM | Message # 63
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
Quote (Balrog)
As you will know, forums are open to all, and comments too, so don't post if you don't want my opinions. As z says ... "don't feed the troll!"


Well that may well have to change. Something for the club members to look at I think.

Quote (Balrog)
I know I'm rocking the boat again because I want the rules to go back to what they where written as ... R.A.W. Forever! ... and all the tweaks to be removed, imho


And there is no chance of that happening so give it a bloody rest

Quote (Balrog)
I've been a Mod forever over a wide range of weird & wonderful websites and know the score. They'll simply ask me to respond to your complaint, to try and work things out with you, and then do nothing. To be honest, they'll most likely not even respond! So don't worry about making a complaint. I've lost track of the knocks against me across the globe ... the mods usually call me by my first name now! ... Walts


Well good for you. Nice to know that you have such a high opinion of yourself and such a low opinion of moderators. Can you please post where and who I can get in touch with please

Cheers

Gerry

And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
zellakDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 8:46 PM | Message # 64
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1542
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Quote (gerrywithaG)
The above has just shown your unsuitabilty as forum moderator for the club, not somthing new I should add.


I agree.

It has been said that we must keep Walter as forum moderator because of his IT skills.

Is this really the case ? He is a troll.

How can a forum have a troll as a moderator???

Better to let the forum crash and burn than be at the mercy of this nonsense.

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. "
 
gerrywithaGDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 8:59 PM | Message # 65
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
I'm actually very sorry that a very interesting and well argued thread has been destroyed in the manner that it has.

But zellak is right, this is getting to be just nonsense

Cheers

Gerry

And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
BalrogDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 9:42 PM | Message # 66
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Hi Guys ... Seems to be the same old arguments keep popping up. I had hoped that players would consider my "RAW Forever" plug again, but I guess we're going to have to "agree to disagree" on the AT-43 issues, so I'll go and hide under the bridge again, honest Guv'ner! wink

I just can't see why you always keep plugging it as an administrator issue? Say I was just a "member" of the forums, I'd still give the same opinions!?

Just so you know, no administartor can deny a "poster" from ANY forums or threads, else he would be in trouble with abusing his position! So what diff does it make whether I'm a "member" or "administrator", I'm still allowed to plug the AT-43 RAW? I know it's getting old for us all, so please PM me an answer! Maybe I should create another account as a "Member" too help you guys know when I'm posting as a club member? ... PM's please, I'm hiding again! tongue Walts
 
pavlovDate: Tuesday, 15-May-2012, 10:12 PM | Message # 67
Major general
Group: Member
Messages: 289
Reputation: 27
Status: Offline
Edit
Message edited by pavlov - Thursday, 17-May-2012, 5:06 PM

There is f&*k all cool about 10+ civil engineers running around every battlefield
 
BanksiDate: Wednesday, 16-May-2012, 9:24 PM | Message # 68
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation: 33
Status: Offline
It's a shame we came to this.

A conclusion to one of our threads would have been good for a change, even if it was just to say that what we use right now is OK!

What I find is that if a post goes over 3 paragraphs the points made tend to get lost somehow.

In this thread I found myself changing my views several times, I'm not saying that's wrong, actually it's the opposite.


Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
 
gerrywithaGDate: Wednesday, 16-May-2012, 9:33 PM | Message # 69
Major general
Group: Confirmed
Messages: 251
Reputation: 19
Status: Offline
Ian,

Apologies from me for my part in it.

As you say it would have been nice to get an agreed resolution.

A lot of good points were made and it would have been interesting to try out some of the ideas

Cheers

Gerry

And I am watching YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
 
BalrogDate: Wednesday, 16-May-2012, 10:58 PM | Message # 70
Aun Va III
Group: Member
Messages: 667
Status: Offline
Soz Banksi ... I can't seem to keep off the AT43 RAW bandwagon. The more I understand things within the Errata's, French rulebooks, etc, the worse I get. But, I know it's getting old & tired, so that "trolls" gone away to hide under the bridge again.

I'm Just waiting for a couple of responses to cleaning out the cack I started, and the thread will be more in tune with what u originally asked. Once again, apologies with dragging ur thread down with my petty, egotistical opinions ... Walts
 
CheDate: Saturday, 19-May-2012, 1:27 PM | Message # 71
Lieutenant general
Group: Member
Messages: 527
Reputation: 61
Status: Offline
I'm rather late to this thread and no one will probably read this but.... Going back to the Soldiers/infantry/support units debate it says on page 47 of the Rule Book (yes I actually downloaded a copy!!)

• Infantry includes all the fighters capable of moving by
their own means. They are split into two categories: soldiers
and support units.

This would suggest to me that support units could not be used instead of soldier units as they are both subsets of Infantry. Am I stating the obvious? Has this been sorted out and I'm just catching up? I'm not known for my rational contributions to these debates but I thought I'd try it.

Wargamers like to paint their privates!!
 
zellakDate: Saturday, 19-May-2012, 2:22 PM | Message # 72
Generalissimo
Group: Member
Messages: 1542
Reputation: 65
Status: Offline
Hi Che.

Yes you are correct.

When it says soldier in the army lists...this means Type 1/ Type 2 / Type 3 units.

When it says Infantry in the army lists ...this means Type 1/ Type 2 / Type 3 units or support units.

So the Karman vanilla list cannot take support units, as it says Soldier and not Infantry.

The Red Blok army book list is the same.
Message edited by zellak - Saturday, 19-May-2012, 3:00 PM

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: Saturday, 19-May-2012, 2:49 PM | Message # 73
Major general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 417
Reputation: 33
Status: Offline
Quote (Che)

This would suggest to me that support units could not be used instead of soldier units as they are both subsets of Infantry. Am I stating the obvious? Has this been sorted out and I'm just catching up? I'm not known for my rational contributions to these debates but I thought I'd try it.


There is nothing wrong in stating a fact that clarifies issues.

Of course I know your name, it's your face I can't remember - Parahandy
 
Forum » AT-43 Discussions » AT-43 - Armies » Karman - vanilla list - support units (Karman core list errata)
Page 4 of 4«1234
Search:

Copyright MyCorp © 2017