Re: [Epic] RGMW Newsgroup.

From: Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 09:49:21 -0500

Thane Morgan wrote:
>
> To anyone who bitches about why the content is so poor on mail groups,
> here is a great example. People disbelieve your tactics, you try to
> explain them, they claim you play bad opponents.

        Relative to yourself, yes. Or are you saying that
you didn't win because of superior skill? (if so, then why
did you win? luck?)

> > > > Chaos vs Nids (in case you haven't guessed, these two cases are real
> > > > sticking points with me).
> > >
> > > Never lost this battle as chaos. Lots of minotaurs and trolls (I've killed several
> > > dominatrixes with trolls and minotaurs).
> >
> > What I'm really talking about is these kinds of games
> > against someone of equal skill. From the comment above, it
> > seems pretty certain that the 'nid players you've faced aren't
> > all that great - anyone who advances their Dom to be within
> > charge range of minotaur warbands deserves what they get. And
> > anyone who didn't see it coming doubly deserves it... I can
> > maybe see this working once, but if you keep managing to do it
> > time after time...
>
> The 'nid player"s" were both very good; I drew them into charge range
> with bait or threat; either take the chance or have your dominatrix do
> nothing the whole game; or move the dom away from a more obvious threat.

        Having the Dom do nothing is preferable to losing it. If
you're going to move it away from some other threat, move it back
towards your baseline or at least away from the bulk of the enemy
army. Anyone who continually falls into this sort of trap just
isn't paying attention.

> Its real easy to sit back and say "if anyone loses to that tactic, they
> must be stupid." I'm not impressed.

        I didn't say the other players were stupid, and I'm not
degrading your tactics. I'm impressed that you've been able to
pull this sort of thing off, but if the nid players have never
managed to adapt and pull off a win against you, then that points
to some greater issue. Such as, you're a heck of a lot better
with chaos than these guys are with the bugs.

> > I agree that army selection is not the be-all and
> > end-all of the game; I've beaten a number of cheesy armies
> > played by less than amazing generals. I was disputing
> > your contention that army selection counts in E40k and
> > that it does not in SM/TL.
>
> That was not my contention. I'm saying army selection counts much more
> in E40k than in sm/tl, and that balance was more effective than cheese
> when well played.

        Well, I just recently cleared out my trash folder so I
can't go back and check, but it sure sounded to me like you were
complaining about how much army selection counted in E40k and
that it didn't matter that much in SM/TL. Actually, it looks
like that's what you were saying. I still disagree, I think it's
about equal in both games. Tactics, luck, and relative skill
are still major deciding factors in who wins.

Scott Shupe
shupes_at_... shupes@... http://www.rpi.edu/~shupes
***********************************************************************
"Don't you laugh, damn you, don't you laugh!" - Clockwork Orange
Received on Thu Feb 26 1998 - 14:49:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:24 UTC