|
|
Post by heatseeker on Feb 27, 2006 18:33:40 GMT -6
i think we should lock this discussion as it's really going nowhere. the rules are completely subjective to interpretation and therefore a house rule would probably be best.
|
|
|
|
Post by e1567 on Feb 27, 2006 18:53:34 GMT -6
Ah but this discussion shall strengthen our knowledge of the game and maybe one of us will ask gw.....
|
|
|
|
Post by siriq on Feb 27, 2006 19:18:08 GMT -6
yah dont lock it, just because matt finds it boring, i think this has inspired us all and will continue to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 28, 2006 8:17:02 GMT -6
GW has told us, because I asked them. It's in one of the responses on the second page. And it won't be locked, just don't put any useful posts up.
|
|
|
|
Post by heatseeker on Feb 28, 2006 13:23:13 GMT -6
i dont see how it's inspiring anyone when we're just using crackpot theories of what gw is trying to say in their rules. gw themselves didnt even have a clear cut answer of how to resolve that conflict. maybe this discussion was best from the beginning on the gw boards if they could even resolve their own rules. i just dont see this going anywhere if gw couldn't even answer it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bloodangellh on Feb 28, 2006 14:37:35 GMT -6
Well that's because GW writes the most convulted rules ever. You have to be an english major just to sort everything out sometimes. But that's not the problem, sometimes there just simply is no answer because GW does not always use standardized terms which causes even more headaches. For example, they seem to like to interchange model, unit, squad, and force organization entry. They need some consistancy in their writing.
For this discussion, if they would have simply said that vunerable to blasts affects the model, then we wouldn't need this thread, but they used unit, which is undefined by them officially, and would cause the rule to conflict with their rules for using blast markers. Unit, I believe was used to stress the difference between a vehicle and a squad, but we'll never know as they never seem to answer questions people ask.
|
|
|
|
Post by siriq on Feb 28, 2006 19:29:15 GMT -6
well matt just because you dont understand whats going on in this thread doesnt mean the rest of us dont  you just want to get rid of it because you have nothing to say. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by heatseeker on Feb 28, 2006 19:58:51 GMT -6
ya i would have to agree with you there luong, doesnt answer the question though since gw is probably retarded in whomever is writing these rules.
ya whatever caleb, shows how much you think you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 28, 2006 20:02:30 GMT -6
Case closed.
|
|
you just want to get rid of it because you have nothing to say. ;D