I've got a lite special tonight just for harley-

I know how much you dislike being spammed with the invite feature- so the "won't you be my friend" thread in chit chat may be something you could help me with.

But for those of you who want to put a little hair on your chest-

The politics debate is really heating up, the conservatives vs liberals (and me as the voice of reason). Think you can handle it- post your view, but try to read the other posts before you do so (lest you miss something juicy like Byron did).

And afterwards you can come back here- nothing settles the stomach better after a day of politics then milk and brownies. I must admit you have a point Rog.

------------

I think I should have renamed this topic unit diversity and the importance of tactics rather then "HC are the antichrist". People still seem to think it is about them, but its really about players using very few units types in their battle set ups (maby 3-4) and relying on overwhelming power of force rather then tactical skill to win. HC are just the reason I think this happens- their expense prohibits unit diversity and their power makes the strait on rush a viable option.

Not that don't appreciate the other posts- but no one has really commented on this statement, and it IS the reason I started this post (not to find out how to counter HC).

--------

Yes tarim that is effective, but it's not wise to employ HC against demonic- and I think most players know that. If you don't set the races beforehand you may surprise and HC rusher, but don't put most of your pts into anti HC units that my not get used. You'd be left just as vulnerable as that HC rusher by not using an array of units. However, I don't really know how this applys to demonic- I can comment best on Medi vs Medi.

Ok street, but campaigns have alot of variables and its hard to comment on how my issue applys to them. But your right, using only HC as a mele troop is not wise even in campaign games.

There are tactical advantagpes to limiting the troop types you produce to 3-4.

that sounds like something my wife would say.

you know. she starts thinking about something, verbalises the end bit of the "conversation" and then looks at me expectantly like i'm supposed to understand wtf she's going on about.

of course, i just sit there looking much like this

fill me in someone please.

The "Nuking from Orbit" is a great strat that a friend used at a Games Workshop 'Warhammer 40k' competition day.

While young children were arriving with their badly painted armies of space marines and bored-looking parents in tow("we spent £200 on this so we want to see you play it"),a friend of mine turned up with half a ping-pong ball and some blu-tack,attached it to the ceiling,and,for the price of an army,wiped out the whole batttlefield and won.

Amidst heartbroken sobbing kids and seething,spitting parents,GW erased orbital lasers from their competition rules pretty much straight after,but oh how we laughed.

lol man, that just doesn't happen every day

Eh in my defense of going off on the political issue, you hit me 15 mins before I was due at work and all I got was "someone's bashing your seniors". lol I skimmed and jumped right on it...As far as it being a republican vs democrat debate well...I'm neither...I prefer to vote independent...ok enough diverting off the topic at hand...I say let's kill off the heavy cavalry and go straight to F-16s loaded with heat seaking missiles.

blood, i agree that i'd like to see more strategies available to players, but i've always thought that is the fault of the battle map, not the units. the map generally forces you into straight ahead, my hc vs your hc type confrontations. you are about the only player i've come across even moderately successful at flanking manuevers. i generally get kicked if i try it.

I think 3-4 unit types already is a diverse formation. i don't know if i've used more than that since my first game when kichi cleaned my clock. more types than that, you won't have any "power of force" which means you'll lose more often than not.

this discussion sounds to me a lot like what people were saying about marksmen before req lowered their attack factors. i hope that's not what you want for HC.

i would venture to say that the straight ahead crush 'em or die trying strategy still makes a fun game, and takes quite a bit of good tactical ability to win. particularly to win regularly. nowadays since most good players are on to it, only a fool would try it though (more than once in awhile anyway )

BigAmigo and wildcat make good points about using 3-4 units, but it becomes a problem when over 1/2 your points are dedicated to one unit. I saw a set up once where a player used an initial force of spears and arbs (maby 1500 pts) to lure the player into attack and then had the rest of his army (or at least almost all of it, I can't remember) maxed out with HC. It had the desired effect, but if I employed an anti-HC army he would have had little recourse, as his other units were already dead. The point I was trying to make is that when you load up on one or two units you leave yourself vulnerable to a player countering those units. Personally I think that players can get almost as much bang for their buck by employing a set up that isn't as counterable (using a more diverse unit set up) with the only set back being one needs to depend more on tactics for the set up to work well.

I battled wildcat when I was still fiddling around with my 5k set up and tactics- and if I remember he employed alot of HC and about 4 marks (don't know about any other unit types in quantity). The flank would have worked better (and perhaps well enough to win the battle) if I had had a better knowledge of unit LOS or more experience with my tactics. I had 2 knights ready to move in on his unprotected marks, but they couldn't move the whole distance in one turn so I tried to set them up on the edge of his LOS. I obviously guessed wrong, because he saw them and was able to shift enough froces down to take them out- little damage done. It was battles like these where the devastating effect of protected marks became apparent- and I learned through experience that I had to deal with that if I was going to be successful.

I totally agree with you wildcat, it does take skill to win consistantly with any strat- and I've played HC rushers who used very effective tactics. No matter how much I get rushed by HC I refuse to employ an anti-HC strat (or to use them myself) and it has made for some very close games against good HC rushers (sometimes winning with only one unit left). So yes it can be fun, and though an HC rush seems to me like putting too much into one unit it can be skillfully employed.

The problem is that, to me, it is very impersonal- wam, bam, boom your dead or I'm dead in one big blood bath (which I do not really enjoy despite my name's connotations). I don't see the player I'm against in an HC rush- it doesn't have alot of personality, its not a signature strat. It doesn't require any unique approach to work, and thus most HC rushes play alot like the last one- it gets repetitive. I'd like to see players employ personalized strats and play them in a way that makes it their own- it adds a color and enjoyment that surpasses the thrill of being the last man standing after a long battle with an HC rusher (though I can't say I've experienced it- I can only speculate).

As for the map being the limmiting factor I would have to disagree- the map and unit lists are only as limmiting as your immagination and desire to experiment. Keep in mind that half the units on that list are not really being employed- and that most players don't even try to go for those gutsy tactics (or even those that are reletively safe) because with their set up they don't have to.

Last Edited : Wednesday, 6 August 2003 - 00:05

Maby LT should add finding your own strat as one of the goals of S.C.U.M, because in the end this is what I would like to see- more personality in battle games and more reliance on skill then strength (not that players are HC brutes, but if you really want to find yourself you need to think beyond conventional wisdom). I must say that I stumbled onto the light one tired night in a practice game, and I haven't been the same since. I saw the evil of HC, and how they had clouded the minds of the people with their high hp and att/def- I made it my mission to change WOL one battle at a time, spreading the Good Word of unit diversity and tactics untill HC were exposed as the Demonic units they are.


And gueritol says I don't have religion

i usualy throw my spear at the hc lose a few then since hc one attack per turnthey kill one stack of spear whil you are marking them then when they finaly get through the spear wall they have my 4 mace and 2 hc to look forward to ive use this strat only 4 times and won everytime so i don't know if it is a 100% strat against hc or lucky strat
also i found it useful getting commandeers to put back with your marks to give them the extra attack boost and if needed to commit suicide to save your marks they make a great zoc block i have use this strat once and won with it so like i said may not be 100% strat

We can forgive Tyler for thinking this thread is still about HC, but I went through all the trouble of typing that stuff so I'd like someone to comment on it.

ok, you asked me in a private message to make a few comments here. Here ya go.

The tactic (in my game) is primarily dictated by the time frame in which I am planning to battle in. I am not the type that always rush, or the type that never rush. I operate based on the turn and the economy of the warring players and their units.

Now you have to look at the cost/benifiet factor and what does each unit bring to the battle. There are 4 general classifications of battle units. Rock, paper and scissors.... and ranged. I require a substansial amount of comms and I have found that in MOST cases siege units dont provide a good ROI.

Now without giving free lessons here I can assure you that I use different types of units based on when in the game the war is taking place and the type of units they possess. However, HC is a VERY powerful unit with speed. respect it, but know how much each units cost, I mean really cost in terms of opportinity costs and research too.

Thanks for posting; I'll try to apply what you said to battle games. Yes HC are powerful, but I believe what they are "really costing" players in battle games is more then their worth. But only when they form the backbone of an army (40% pts). Still, I haven't seen a player only use a few HC- it's usually either all or nothing.

I don't want to keep re-typing the same thing, so I encourage people to read my last big post (at least). I know its long, but its worth the read and it brings up a topic I'd like people to comment on (personality in battle) as well as unit diversity and tactics (which I think HC hamper). Thanks for your posts so far, but I'd like to see some on these topics for a change.

I just won a battle game using 3 HC, 4 mace, 2 scouts and 3 marks. My opponent took knights and arbs.

Though my above post was directed at camapign games of course. BTW I do not play many battle games so I cant judge there.

looks to me BA used a very tough, balanced army for a battle (though what he's stated adds up to around 4200 points, so we're not getting the whole story!! ). i've used similar many times. Don't rush this formation lightly unless he does something obviously stupid early on, (unlikely in BA's case).

my last thoughts on battle tactics are that I personally like having HC and have won more than my fair share when they are on my roster. It is a unit enemies dread to see and for good reason! They are most definitely not the "right" answer for every situation, but if you have them in quantity it is the other player who has the main tactical problem, not you. Face it, we're not all Rommel (or whoever is leading in the Greatest Military Leader thread). I have my level because of practice, and the ability to learn from others, not because i'm some tactical genius. Its guys like you blood who add variety and spice to the game, i say keep it up and i'll look forward to fighting you again!

Also keep in mind, if Req gets his way and he usually does, there won't be an overall best unit in the future but a group of best units. That should and probably will create the type of mixed and diverse tactics that you are wishing. I can't wait for this to happen, btw.

Really?? 4200?? maybe only 3 mace then... but you get the point. I had the counter to the Knights, HC.

Lol, you give me too much praise- I haven't even broken 100 yet. Your right, HC are effective- and can be very powerful in the hands of an experienced player. I guess I'm just a seat of your pants kind a' guy who likes a good challenge- and a set up that works equally well in almost any situation (no major faults, no great strengths).

The group of best units may work out well; I just hope they aren't exactly the same unit with a different class (RPS). Closer values would be good, but a smaller unit hierarchy would work better then an equal one. Either way, as you said, it may get players to try something new (and perhaps find something they really like).

The problem is that I see players like LOD getting bored with their strat- and if this is the case I'm trying to encourage people to experiment. Don't be afraid to drop units you've come to depend on (like HC) if it means finding a strat you like. I would never have thought my set up would work untill I actually tried it- so don't be afraid to think WAY outside the box.

That's what I really want out of this post, for players to find a set up they fully enjoy- not just one that works. If I can get at least a few players to experiment with units and tactics in the future all this typing will be worth it. If not I'll just have to save my "particular" brand of thought for the FSA forums.

If you really enjoy rushing with HC then by all means do it- but if it ever starts to get a little old remember that the really good set ups are often the hardest to spot, and maby you haven't found the best one for you yet.

If I have swayed anyone to experiment please let me know, I'd like to know how much of a difference this has made.


P.S. Big- Someone playing Knights as thier ONLY mele unit has not been HC rushed before ( I should know, because before Pimp rushed me in a game I used only Knights too). They look like great mele to back up ranged- untill that first wave of HC wipes them out.

HC being the best? hah ,try counter fodder

I know what to talk about, the new 6k battle games

I know we only got them yesterday, but has anyone given them a run through yet? This opens up a whole new realm troop posibilities (and tactics), and my make HC an even more devestating force (). I'm going to be working my tail off the next few days and probably won't get a chance to give them an inaugural run.

One big problem I see is that 10 min turn limit: now with the posibility for so many troops one may find themselves being forced out of the game (not even by the player, becaue the penalty is automatic when you pass 10 min). I tend to go over once or twice in 5 k game, so I don't want to think about how bad I'll be in the six.

But what do you guys think?

Last Edited : Monday, 20 October 2003 - 01:10

Sorry, but I'm jumping back to the HC 'dilema', and I agree. But I discovered it(since I'm at a lower level) with the Marks(even though they have been lowered). After I was beaten by them, the combination and the cost and the vision of having shootouts outs just did'nt appeal to me. So I worked on a counter and it worked, and was a lot of fun, too. Another thing is, that if your opponent is devistated by good strategy on the way to an HC 'rush', it won't have that much power behind it. Ur rite!