Kirb your enthusiasm!


"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him

Saturday, June 5, 2010

Blocking follow up

Well Dethtron wrote a nice little internet rage about Wyddr's fail and used the joyous words and phrases I thought better of (well, didn't type). You can see his article here. The debate continuned quite heatedly between Rummy & Smurfy (oh btw; thanks Rummy for editting Smurfy's post and taking my name out of the link to my blog...way to steal my information! *rages*). You can find my original discourse here which links back to the original article. It's been locked thanks to the raging back and forth but I really want to highlight something that Rummy has been saying. I won't quote because it's over a few posts but you can check the backlinks.

Basically what Rummy was saying is that Smurfy (and by assocation, us who know how to block) is assuming the LR user doesn't have a back-up plan. Let's quote chumby for this reply:

"Sit back and shoot? Way to waste 500 points. Win Eldar.
Slink around and go sideways? Eldar have superior mobility. Win Eldar.
Try and ram? S5 vs AV10 with a 3+ save, good luck with that. Win Eldar."

Now really, what the hell is the back-up plan for a cc unit and non-gunboat which cannot go forward. I will always advocate the LRC over other LRs because it actually can impose on the battlefield when it's immoblised and has a lot of firepower compared to a Godhammer. But seriously, a LRC w/termies not moving towards the enemy who WANTS to keep you at arms that your brilliant back up plan? As Chumby said, Eldar win. Any other army using blocking wins as well. Slowing down one of the best combat units in the game and dictating its movement is a GOOD THING. Even if you have an amazing back-up plan (like a back flip over the blocking, the blocking has stopped the primary use of your termies, smashing my army. What is so hard to understand about slowing/dictating/stopping your opponent's movement as good? You all complain and be-moan Lash because it can do these things to infantry but don't care about tank shocking and blocking?

What on earth...

I'll do some proper How To follow-ups/analysis on tank shocking and protecting infantry with tank hulls later. But that what passes for on forums these days?

81 pinkments:

Smurfy said...

It was a mod co-op tag team to "hey this guy is standing up, let's try to get him to make a big mistake and ban him"

MagicJuggler says that the Mod who locked it said it was my fault.

Yet, I have not got a email. I have not got a warning, I have not got a single peep out of those dickwads who clearly troll'd and flamebaited the last page of that thread.

Avoided my questions.
Made sure everything was half-truths.
Not going into detail so NO one else reading the thread knows WTF they're talking about.

40kOnline community - You make me sick, you let this happen to me and you just watched.

Have fun not listening to me, I on the other hand made made your Mod Team enraged by a stupidly simple idea.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Because MagicJuggler is an authority on the inner workings of the mod-team amirite?

Chumbalaya said...

3 guesses who anon is, lol.

So 40konline is shit. Shall we start the ban timer?

Kirby said...

Someone from 40kO I bet.

It'll be a sad state of affairs if they do ban anyone for attempting to enlighten someone when they were flamebaiting <3. Then we can have cenorship fun! But I'll leave that to Stelek lol

GML said...

I was the one who locked the thread and I never said that it was anyones fault that it was locked. The reason it was locked is it was circling the drain , going no where, and people were getting aggitated where there really was no need to.

Hence locked.

If you ever have an issue with a thread getting locked maybe it would be a good idea to ASK THE MODERATOR WHO LOCKED THE THING instead of getting incorrect second hand information from someone who is hating on the staff?

Wait... that's almost a GOOD IDEA!

GML said...

Also, no one was banned from that, unlike other communities, you do not get banned if you make a staff member angry.

Though, if you want we can start a process to get you banned if you ask nicely.

Dethtron said...

Can you pre-emptively ban me so I'm not tempted to join your sh*tty site? I don't think the relationship would end well.

MagicJuggler said...

Hi. Let me post:

"Because while one member (no names, but the more senior of the two in the debate) was remaining civil while the more junior member was starting to get agitated because he couldn't change what the senior member was saying...

Heated debate yes, flame bait no"

Yeah...not leveling accusations against anyone...

Smurfy said...

Sure there was a need to be agitated -

Last page of that thread was DEVIL'S ADVOCATE mode.

"Yeah cool tactic, but what do you do if X or Y happens?"

That's flamebaiting, it is NOT pertaining to the topic at hand that was "hey try this sometime, it works"

And go ahead, continue to fluff yourselves that me parking a Vyper in front of a Land Raider isn't a good thing to you.

Argue it ALL you want, the majority of us know you'd rather be able to pressure me with that Land Raider full of Termies than sit back and hope to God the enemy is stupid enough to send his force in to let them charge.

Just a thought? It could have all ended if Wyddr just admitted he arguments were going in circles. "No, I'm the 32 yr old and Moderator, I'm right." Pshah

Granite Slam said...

Just a quicky on the removal of the link back to the blog entry that Smurfy posted.

40kOnline has a very strict policy on advertising and Smurfy posted in contravention of it. Besides, given that the entire blog entry was C&P'd in anyway no-one exactly missed anything and furthered the impression that the link was an advert.

If the blog entry hadn't been C&P'd into the thread then it's likely that the link wouldn't have been removed - although that's a guess.

....and just to save you the effort: I suck 40kOnline mod dick.

Smurfy said...

Oh and senior member vs. a junior member.

What elitist labels

Smurfy said...

Adding? So, if I did a report on the site, I would be stealing all my content by saying all the stuff Kirby did and not providing Cred?

Man you guys entirely make sense, look how your Space Marine forum has become a standstill.

Because they know you lot pulled a fucking stunt like that.

Smurfy said...

And I bet the reason the Article isn't approved is because you don't want people to see how childish you all were in doing this.

Or is it too much to ask to stand up to "the man"?

Smurfy said...

And send a PM in to the Mod Team that is clearly against me.

GOOD IDEA! Might as well throw gasoline onto myself and give you the match!

Gornon said...

"What elitist labels"

-How so? Rummy clearly has more experience than you in post number, rank, time spent on the board, and number of posts.

"Man you guys entirely make sense, look how your Space Marine forum has become a standstill."

-The forum seems to be moving at its usual pace.

"And send a PM in to the Mod Team that is clearly against me."

-That's your prerogative. If you don't think we can help or work with you there is nothing we can do to try to address your issues.

To be fair to Rummy, his and my views (How come I didn't get insulted here? I feel let down.)were that blocking can be effective, in the right circumstances. Blocking is not always the best answer. In a kill point mission, you may have stopped your opponent for one turn, but you gave him a Kill Point, furthering his cause.

My Sisters also have trouble with Land Raiders. Our solution is to isolate the Raider. Pop the Rhinos with the Exorcists so when the Raider closes, it is by itself. I would suggest a similar tactic with the Eldar.

MagicJuggler said...

If you're taking Exorcists in a Witchhunter army, there is your problem...

Anonymous said...


If you have beef and won't talk to the people you have beef with about the beef. If you have beef and won't talk to the superiors of the people you have the beef with about the beef. If you have beef and rather than engaging the beef head on in a mature and responsible fashion, instead ranting and raging about the beef on an alternate website, surrounded by fellow beef-havers who will all join in and agree with your beef ...

Well then sir, you have a very unenlightened group of cowboys with a lot of beefs to herd but no markets to sell it to.

Gornon said...

"If you're taking Exorcists in a Witchhunter army, there is your problem... "

-oh ok.

Gornon said...

I would argue that Exorcists are key to taking out mechanized lists and, more importantly, Eldar lists, since we can't possibly hope to close on the Eldar if they do not wish it so.

However, this conversation is more about how the people of this blog view the moderation staff at 40kO as unfair. If you want to make a thread on the Inquisition Forum, I would be happy to carry on the debate there.

GML said...

"Oh and senior member vs. a junior member"

- What is rummy? He is a senior member of the forums. Why? Because he has been around on the forums since christ was a damned cowboy!

Refering to you as a junior member is just the opposite! How long have you been on the forums? Long enough for my hair to grow an inch maybe.

Math might be difficult but it does make sense from time to time.

Kirby said...

Enough internet dramaz, this is not YTTH ^^.

In regards to editting Smurfy's post and removing my name. If you want to call that advertising that's fine, don't remove my name. You can easily remove the link and keep the name and you have all found your way here anyway.

IDK what Smurfy is thinking but calling someone juinor or senior based on time spent there/posts made/etc has no connotations on their senior or juinorness which can appear to relate to their 'expertise' on 40k. Long-time member/new member might be a better way to approach it and I always dislike people arguing with other people when they edit their posts as Rammy did to Smurfy (even if it was for the aforementioned reasoning).

If you want to continue this discussiong about blocking, be my guest but stop the flaming and bitching about everyone. We as a collective group don't like forums for reasons like this. Good tactics are reduced to flamebaiting and quite often bad tactics are bandied about and then mod teams step in and just close/ban/tell people to shut it.

Your perogative and if you want to discuss tactics here you may do so.

Chumbalaya said...

3++ is the new YTTH :P

Exorcists, seriously? Ever hear of autocannon platoons?

Brother Loring said...

*places on a cowboy hat and stetson boots*

*'likes' Kirby's post*

Post number as a measure of seniority is completely fail....

Quality > Quantity in every aspect of forum posting.

Smurfy said...

Simply elitist because a senior member is automatically more qualified than a junior member to you guys.

Which is the problem.

Smurfy said...

And yes, after I posted responses only then did the Mods clarify to make it APPEAR they weren't flamebaiting and trolling.

Clearly I am acting immmature when people sneak that kinda stuff in behind my back?

Smurfy said...

And giving up a Kill Point to delay it from the Termies is much better compared to letting the Assault Termies reign free and eat several KPs at once.

Gee your logic astounds me.

I can't think of any case where a Land Raider has limited options rather than any option it chooses as "better"

Anonymous said...

You go girl, take down those 40konline mod nazi communists. We need a crusader like you to show up and tell the truth about the mighty and long 40konline mod penis. They are a bunchy of sex crazed maniacs and its good we have a man of the people to help bring them down from their corrupt arrogant system.


Smurfy said...

to delay the Termies* I mean.

DAE said...

Has it occurred to you that the Junior/Senior differentiation is a clarification simply of seniority in terms of the forum, considering Rummy is a Global Moderator and Smurfy is a normal member, or is it more convenient to get your panties in a twist and cause a fuss than it is to think about things sensibly? Seriously, pick up a dictionary before you start arguing semantics.

As for the flamebaiting, I'm no longer a member of the 40kO staff but had been for quite some time in the past. What you guys are choosing to interpret as flame baiting is very simply people disagreeing with your viewpoint and putting forward their own opinion. Rather than accepting that people have different preferences and experiences, and while blocking may work exceptionally well in your playing groups it may be very poor in others, instead you feel the need to adamantly demand that blocking is a be all and end all tactic. Your perception of good/bad tactics is plainly not held by everyone and I find it arrogant that you're unable to understand this.

"We as a collective group don't like forums for reasons like this. Good tactics are reduced to flamebaiting and quite often bad tactics are bandied about and then mod teams step in and just close/ban/tell people to shut it."

To me this basically translates as: you don't like Forums because people hold different opinions to you and are free to voice them, yet prefer a blog because people tend to only read and comment on blogs if they already agree with the majority of what's being said. Bandying around phrases like flamebaiting and trolling doesn't make them the fact of the matter, if you think that's what's happened to you in the thread there are umpteen other places I'd suggest you could go to find out the actual meaning of the terms.

Smurfy said...

Have you know I'm a upstanding member at many forums other than 40kOnline and I never get treated this way for having a dissenting opinion.

I never said it was the one all be all answer, but to every case you guys can think of, I see Movement Blocking as the best one...soo...You guys clearly have bad arguments.

And I wasn't the one who got his panties in a knot - it was Wyddr, who denied seeing the truth of it being a more viable option than he said it was, and combined with him suggesting completely straws for other ways to deal with the task at hand ("How do you deal with a Land Raider full of Terminators?") EVERY SINGLE ONE of his responses were completely and utter crap or just reiterating what I was saying but refusing to see that's just what I was indeed saying?

You didn't see the last 20 minutes of that thread, sir. You didn't see how the whole Mod Team converged at once to "shut the smart newb up, we know best and we'll show him"

Again, why hasn't my article linking to the thread been validated? If it isn't a bad tactic people deserve to see. Or you guys know that you all acted immaturely ganging up on a guy who was talking sense while a eltist "senior member" gave up arguing sensibly.

I know my arguments were more concise and well thought out than his, and yet by locking this thread you all are saying he won.

What that message sends to me and the rest of the world is - Don't think differently and don't stand up for yourself or you will get burned.

But of course, this is the exact opposite expectancy of opening a forum, and is complete hogwash.

Kirby said...

"To me this basically translates as: you don't like Forums because people hold different opinions to you and are free to voice them, yet prefer a blog because people tend to only read and comment on blogs if they already agree with the majority of what's being said. Bandying around phrases like flamebaiting and trolling doesn't make them the fact of the matter, if you think that's what's happened to you in the thread there are umpteen other places I'd suggest you could go to find out the actual meaning of the terms. "

To me this translates as I'm simply ignoring what you are saying and putting what I think you're saying down. Look through this blog, there are disucssions and explanations rather than reiterations of the same thing. When incidents like this happen you have to explain why you think your point is valid or the better option because I (and other members) do the same. What generally happens is it doesn't happen and we get replies like Wyddr or GaleRazorwind who eventually disappear.

Again, try and reasonably explain why blocking is bad and let's discuss that. I pulled a Stelek and asked the missus (who knows nothing of the internet but is wondering why someone has their panties in a knot) what she thought of blocking a unit which was much better at punching things so it moved slower with a unit that was less valuable. Her reply: "that's obvious."

End of discussion in regards to what 40kO did, don't bring up those posts again (even you Smurfy). Discuss 40k, not 40kO.

The_King_Elessar said...

It's rare I don't participate in these. lol

I joined 40kO and have posted only about 6 times, because I found it wanting inn quality, for the most part. Just my opinion.

Smurfy said...

Aight, I await a response that tells me why exactly limiting my opponent's options is a bad thing.

Sheepz said...

It's amazing just how far you're taking this injured pride thing. Seriously, something happened on the internet. Stop crying about it. The sheer amount of self righteous whining that's on display is vomit inducing.

Anonymous said...

Smurfy, who the fuck are you? No, seriously kid, who the fuck do you think you are? If you really reckon you're that important that the staff of a site that manages hundreds of members give a shit about you and your retard problems within a day or so of meeting you, and actually care enough to kick off a conspiracy against you then you really must be someone fucking important. So who the fuck are you? Come on? Because currently from where I'm sitting you look like a stupid angsty little kid having a tantrum. You're no-one and you don't know shit.

So about about next time you decide to discuss tactics with someone you put your tiny pencil dick back in your pants, zip it up and try thinking with your brain for a change. I read thought the thread, Wyddr & Rummy were nothing but polite and respectful voicing their opinions and you where nothing but a rude, self-obsessed whiny little crybaby because the whole world didn't bend down to kiss your feet in thanks for you turning up. You have an opinion that might work, he has an opinion that might work, there is no 'right' answer that is the only thing that can possibly be allowed so your ridiculous behaviour of screaming 'devils advocate' at everyone who disagrees with you shows that you're nothing except the total and complete fuckwit that everyone knows you are.

As for begging the question by continually asking "why exactly limiting my opponent's options is a bad thing." you only demonstrate that you're either illiterate or stupid. No-one has suggested that you shouldn't limit your opponents options, they just say that you should use better tactics than suicide rushing units at the first opportunity for little payback. And little payback is exactly what it is because unless you're playing in some moronic game where you've crammed 2500 points of army into the deployment zone of a 6x4 board intended for armies half that size then your opponent will simply drive AROUND your vyper, he loses 4" of movement, you lose a unit. Thats a good trade... oh, wait, no it isn't.
You know what is a good tactic to deal with land raiders? Shooting the shit out of them with brightlances. You tell me why killing your opponent's biggest meanest unit is a bad thing to do and then you might one day have a point to make.

Go on, run off crying to your sad little blog and hang around with your fellow anti-social retards like Stelek the monumentual wanker and suck each other off over how great you think each other are. The fact of the matter is that you're no-one, and no-one gives a shit about you.

You're done. - Hymirl.

Kirby said...

^ irony. Complaining about Smurfy bitching and getting angry and then brings in shit, fuck, dick and retard nice. Swear all you want but don't bring disabilities in. It's going beyond rude. Onto the actual 'tactical' part of what you said.

It's not 4" of movement lost it's more like 6" and if we continue with Smurfy's example of 3 Vypers, it's not moving forward thanks to coherency. TH/SS termies are bone-crushing in combat and delaying that and using more units/firepower to deal with the less units/firepower of the rest of the SM army is fine (remembering the SM also have to shoot down the blocking unit whilst the blockers don't have to target the LR).

Furthermore, "shoot the shit out of them with brightlances" does what? BLs are brought in small numbers to slow heavy enemy armor and aren't spammed because they are so expensive. They help an Eldar army but aren't exactly reliable. Wyddr even did the math, so why are we wasting shots which are much more reliable to stop your Dreads/Preds/Speeders/Rhinos from shooting or moving? Suppression fire FTW. The same goes with other blocking armies such as Tau. Why waste Railguns on an LR when they have a very high chance of removing a Dread/Pred/Speeder/Rhino and Piranhas can block the Raider?

Kirby said...

Also, I don't have a huge issue with swearing but we are linked to FTW/H-O which have young kids reading so keep it on the down-low. Any posts like Hymirl's again and they will be deleted. I don't care if you want to call out the cenorship flags or whatever, it's not hard to not swear every other sentence.

As I've said before, keep it civil. You want to complain about Smurfy, myself or anyone else here, e-mail or keep it to yourself. You want to talk 40k? Here's your spot but let's hear rational arguments.

Brother Loring said...

Agreed on the no swearing point! It's completely unnecessary! If you need to swear just to get your point across go and read a dictionary. I'm not saying I don't, but there's a time and a place... and this pinky little blogspot is not it!

Anonymous said...

Just going to point out that swearing was used quite alot at the top of the page yet neither smurfy or his lover were condemned

shit, dickwad, fuck were all used in copious amounts ;)

Kirby said...

By copious do you mean once each of those words? I'm telling everyone to knock it off and if you look up a few posts I told Smurfy to specifically lay off the e-dramaz. Discuss 40k don't complain about each other.

GML said...

"Have you know I'm a upstanding member at many forums other than 40kOnline and I never get treated this way for having a dissenting opinion."

Which forums? Warseer? Dakka? Forums that are so large that the staff are totally overwhelmed and can't properly enforce their rules so you get away with stuff that should be shut? Yes, totally upstanding I am sure.

"I joined 40kO and have posted only about 6 times, because I found it wanting inn quality, for the most part. Just my opinion."

40kO has a system that works and helps us in enforcing our rules. We are very strict in enforcing our rules and we are actually very open in the fact of how strict we are.

What a lot of people forget is that 40kO is not an "open" forum. It is a privately owned website with strict rules laid down that are enforced. You are there at the good graces of Purple Raine (the site owner) and his designated proxies (Staff).

"...the staff of a site that manages hundreds of members ..."
*cough* thousands. There are currently 35,505 members registered to the site.

Again I am going to state why the thread was locked. It wasn't a conspiracy and the mods weren't jumping down your throat. You stated your opinion and people disagreed with it. You (a new / junior member to the forum) started to get very agitated towards the people (who have been registered to the website for many years / senior members of the forum) that were disagreeing with your opinion while they were remaining civil. The only point I stepped in was when it was getting too hot to keep going and I didn't even mention anything about who was at fault. All I said was that the thread was finished and was locking it before it exploded into a flame war and really got people into trouble.

All this butthurt about senior / junior members came from MagicJuggler stuck his nose in where it didn't belong, took what I said in explaination and totally twisted it to piss you off.

No one was at fault, the thread was finished.

Get over it.

Chumbalaya said...

U mad Hymirl?

If you don't understand why losing movement on your expensive rock unit is good, you are an idiot, plain and simple.

MagicJuggler said...

Yeah...I totally twisted an explanation for the purpose of pissing Smurfy off...and suggesting D-Cannons isn't trolling.

That's comedic gold right there.

Anonymous said...

Bullshit son. You use exactly the same language on other people, the only reason you're turning on the waterworks is because someone is explaining some facts to you. I dare you to delete my post, by doing so you prove to everyone that you're far worse than any of the moderators on 40KO; where they only lock threads that go to the dogs you can abuse your power to silence people in order to protect your pathetic ego.

As to demanding that all of a sudden you want criticism of you or smurfy made by e-mail you must be having a laugh. Your entire blog and most the others linked to it are solely about bitching over other websites. But no, like the complete moron you are you instantly try to change where the goalposts are and hope no-one is going to notice. No chance kiddo.

Secondly, as to 'clarifying' its 3 vypers you hardly improve the point, vastly increased losses on the eldar side... stop them for one turn. Great... there is at least 4 more turns coming after... how many more vypers you got? As I explained this so called 'tactic' is useless when you're not playing in a stupid and poorly run tournament like 'ard boys.

I also find it hilarious that you seem to think that you can't buy many brightlances but apparently can buy dozens of vypers. Go to GW, buy an eldar codex, READ IT, and you might be surprised to find that you can put brightlances ON the vypers. And use the guns to shoot with. I understand this is an advanced tactic that you might not have learned of yet but if you want more of my tuition I'm sure I can help... I'd have to charge though!

Oh look, smurfy's boyfriend has turned up to protect him again! What a surprise. Its a bit of a shame that you can't read, otherwise instead of calling me an idiot you might have realised that I do advocate losing movement on your opponent's expensive rock unit is good, I advocate making them lose ALL their movement by blowing their unit the fuck up.

Hymirl 2 : Morons 0

Lets go again, this is fun! - Hymirl

Chumbalaya said...

Quick, somebody call Dethtron, this shit is hilarious.

Eldar have only so many anti-tank options dipshit. If I can make your big rock useless for a turn so I can focus on other stuff, then that's just easier for me. You can't stop everything at once and in a mech SM list only the LRC full of Termies is incapable of doing anything until it's in your face. I'll throw a Vyper at it to make it useless for a turn, then my entire army is free to go after the support elements, leaving the LR for later. SM support can hurt you from turn 1, the LR has to wait a bit until it's in range.

Seriously, BS3 Bright Lances? Good luck with that.

Smurfy said...

You notice that no one puts Bright Lances on their Vypers for a reason? In that if we did, it'd make the opportunity cost null and void?

Again, Wyddr did the math for us as Kirby pointed out, why am I wasting all my shots on a Land Raider when I can simply block it?

"Grander plan; you can't predict the enemy exactly" argument tries to present itself again, and fails again. By doing this Tactic I know the options you have, it's not unexpected the Vyper(s) die (and why should I cry about it?), and I know no one likes a simple tactic to shut down a key unit in their army.

Don't bring up "Maybe they're a feint" again because we all know playing with your army 500 points down (Which is essentially what this is doing by taking a LR+Termies out of the action.) is always a bad thing. Kinda how I lured Abbaddon out in that BR I posted.

Smurfy said...

You are sneaky, saying you are agreeing with me while trying to argue against it at the same time, bravo sir.

Now can we go back to civility?

Anonymous said...

*grabs popcorn*

Kirby said...

send some here please Anon!

@Hymirl; I don't care if you want to insult us, etc. but don't use language I think is inappropriate for the blog. I don't have mod-like powers and can't edit your posts like forums can, so it's either play nice or don't play at all. When it comes down to it I don't care what people on the internet think cause they are...wait for it, on the internet. I really don't care what people IRL think either unless they mean something to me. I follow my code of ethics & morales and banding about colloquial terms of stupidity for mental disabilities is crossing those lines.

Onto your "points." Again, you shoot down the blockers and you have less firepower going into the Eldar and the Eldar have the same amount of firepower going into your Raiders support whilst the TH/SS termies are being slowed down. This gives Eldar (or any other blocking army) more battlefield control.

Suggesting BLs on Vypers is like suggesting Banshees & Scorpions over Dragons. BS3 and 30pts? No thanks, I'd rather have as many shot as possible compared to one way overpriced and not that great at anti-tank one. BLs are usable on Serpents because they are TL-d and you need some sort of ranged anti-tank.

Land Raiders are expensive for a reason, AV14 isn't exactly easy to blow up. By sacrificing a unit or two to delay it I get my anti-tank dropping the rest of your army and then when I can bring guns to bear (such as meltaguns) I can start to focus on the Raider but thanks to having proper target prioirty with my ranged weapons, I'm ignoring it initially and thus blocking helps my army survive this "ignoring."

There are many examples of games when the LR w/termies essentially just gets diverted and blocked all game and is never shot at and the opposing army still wins because they are controlling the board. Board control = win.

Anonymous said...

Holy shit kirby, you really are completely fucking stupid aren't you? You love jumping on the bandwagon to slag people off and bitch and whine when you think its not going to come back in your face but as soon as some-one turns up to teach you some facts for a change you instantly start crying.... PATHETIC. You just love acting the bully boy, code of ethics my ass... you're just despeating trying to find any excuse you can to avoid having to justify yourself and your piss poor behavior.

But thats why you do your bitching and whining on your private little blog isn't it? Its because you kiddies don't have enough social skills to be part of a community, and don't have the intelligence to conduct a reasoned debate... the only option you lot have is shrill screaming until threads get locked and then to run away to somewhere that you can simply delete any of the comments that explains to you how utterly wrong you are. If you didn't want this argument, you shouldn't have got involved.

At the top of the page you wrote your support for whoever that dethtron loser is, which means you are directly stating your support for statements like " Smurfy went over to 40k online to pee in the kiddie pool" you can't turn around and ask for the moral high ground you moron. I'm not the one thats filled your blog with stupid behavior, you're the misbehaving puppy thats shit on his own carpet... I'm just here to rub your nose in it and teach you a lesson. So next time some loser kid like Smurfy shoots his mouth off acting like a complete faggot you might think twice... (hell you might think once!) Before declaring your support for him and his boyfriend. I am not here to be nice to you.

Back to explaining how wrong you are, "Board control = win"

Bullshit, you don't have board control... you've delayed someone by what? 6" you said... well I thought 4" but if you really think that extra 2" is something anyone gives a shit about... no, not the 2" cock in your pants, we're talking about 40K. Try to pay attention.

Other point that proves how wrong you are? You.
"BLs are brought in small numbers to slow heavy enemy armor"

Yes they are! And you know what bit of heavy armour you ought to try and slow with the bright lance? I'll give you a guess...

Secondly just like Smurfy's main failure of paying attention that kick started this whole mess. I fully support board control, what I disagree with is that blocking is the primary method of how to do it but....

No-where have I said that blocking is useless.

Go look if you think otherwise.

What I have said is that other options are worth considering, do you know what 'considering' means? I know its a long word so you might want to take a break here to go and look it up. For a start you might be shocked to discover that not every game of 40K is eldar against marines... many armies do have the ability to shoot a land raider dead and it would be lunacy for them to go for a blocking tactic as a primary option.

So in summary fuck off and learn how to read, and then fuck off and learn how to play 40K. I'd suggest going to some tournaments where skill and talent is needed to win games unlike 'ard boys where the standard big=best USA supersize-me standard mentality destroys any idea of army ballance by cramming 2500 worth of army into a deployment zone designed for 1500... which as I mentioned (not that you managed to read it) is about the only time blocking might work as a primary tactic.

Oh look, facts, and now you look like a complete idiot. Shame.

Hymirl 3 : Morons 0

Want to go again kids? - Hymirl

Kirby said...

For someone demanding I read you miss a lot. You also contradict yourself. BLs are not going to reliably stop an LR, they have a chance at it but you can block and send your firepower elsewhere. You know target priority right? Killing as much as possible rather than sending all your guns which are capable of killing a LR is better than the chance to destroy a LR. You know T-Fexes & Broadsides are 'capable' anti-AV14 but I'd much rather have the higher chance of dropping a Rhino/Pred/Speeder/Dread. Remember me saying this before?

Notice how I've also used multiple armies and reference the original argument for Eldar v SM. Slowing your opponent's = board control. You're dictating their movement and if you're doing this efficiently (i.e. cheap vypers/speeders/piranha/DE Raiders/etc) you've got an advantage, yes? Add in the specific example of Eldar having more mobility to begin with and better defenses thanks to AV12/fields.

Look real facts. Notice how you can actually debate (not that I'd call this a debate) or dicuss (ditto) something without being a wanker? *pats*

Smurfy said...

Wow bringing the topic up when I sent in a PM apologizing, jeez lueze.

Anonymous said...

You are being way too lenient with the points, it is far closer to 10 - 0 by now, Hymirl.

Smurfy said...

Surely all this great advice is going where it's noticed and not on 40kOnline, more better to us <3 Thank you Hymirl for promoting our site more.

Chumbalaya said...

So much bile, lol. Hymirl the ultra-scrub shaking off his forum repression and swearing it up like a 13 year old who first learned he can say naughty words when mom and dad are away.

Now, scrub, and I'm going to keep calling you scrub, what the fuck are you talking about? The Land Raider is only good when it can drop off the TH/SS Termies into assault. The SM support is in use from turn 1. Throw a sacrificial lamb to slow down the LR and you now have at least 1 more turn to focus on the support and not have to worry about the Termies.

Board control is where you dictate your opponent's movement to, durr hurr, control the board. Blocking him means he can't go that way, meaning you dictate his movement, which means board control. Seriously, are you just not getting this?

Let's try it even simpler. Bad Lnad Riader am smash my elfdar. Bad Lnad Riader no move? No move mean no smash my elfdar? No smash elfdar = elfdar win.

L2P, noob.

Anonymous said...

Learn to spell first chum

and seriously scrub? scrub? scrub? oh deary me

Vinsanity said...

Haters gonna hate...

Brb, getting the popcorn.

Smurfy said...

I sent a PM to the Mod Team, gee, thanks for thinking that way when I was clearly on a highway to hell so to speak as I posted that mere minutes after the whole event.

You however think it's a problem I'm saying I'm sorry?

GML said...

I've said my bit, explaining why I did what I did... now who is going to share some popcorn?

Anonymous said...

You admit that you made a mistake and in fairness that is a start. I'm not an unreasonable guy so tell you what, I'll throw you a bone and give you a second chance...

So what I'll do is I'll watch your posts, consider it an opportunity to impress me, you think you're all that? Well then, you better lose your shitty know it all attitude, start respecting people's opinons, lose your clueless behaviour and in general start doing a lot better. We can all be happy and I won't have to come back here to have more words with you will I? Which I'm sure will be appreciated by all of us.

As friendly advice I suggest you lose your overprotective bf cumbalova too.

- Hymirl.

Chumbalaya said...

"I will divert attention from the argument at hand because I know mine is shit. I know, calling somebody gay is totally going to win."

Hymirl in a nutshell. L2P. Back to your fail forum.

Smurfy said...

So are you asking of me to stand down and just watch the show? Or can I attempt to have my own input?

Anyways, are we done here or do you wanna debate the merits/cons of movement blocking like Kirby's asking/

Kirby said...

Post removed Hymirl for lack of content and being foul. Try again.

MagicJuggler said...

I play Orks. I hate when Marines refuse to play by my rules, and do *not* choose to drive their Land Raiders straight into my Deffrollas. Sometimes they'll engage the Land Raiders at an oblique angle, firing the Multimeltas at their side armor.

So I bring Warbuggies. They're fragile yes, and can barely hit the broadside of a barn (though they do help suppress lighter armor), but unlike Deffkoptas, they're vehicles. Meaning you can't tank shock them out of the way. Meaning you can block off angles of movement, preventing the Land Raiders from moving *away* from your Deffrollas.

Even better is if they can hem the movement of a Land Raider, preventing it from attaining Cruising Speed; Ork Warbosses appreciate being able to hit on a 4+...

Anonymous said...

What happens MJ when the land raider decides to ram your little trakk and flips the bitch?

MagicJuggler said...

*a* Strength 5 hit. That *must* roll an Explodes result. So about an 11/12 chance that the Land Raider the Marines go "Stop the Land Raider...I think we smeared the new paint job."

Dethtron said...

ok I'm back. Did I miss anything?

Anonymous said...

Oh man, it's getting good Dethtron.
*passes the popcorn*

My favorite bit so far "Smurfy, who the fuck are you? No, seriously kid, who the fuck do you think you are? If you really reckon you're that important that the staff of a site that manages hundreds of members give a shit about you and your retard problems within a day or so of meeting you, and actually care enough to kick off a conspiracy against you then you really must be someone fucking important. So who the fuck are you? Come on? Because currently from where I'm sitting you look like a stupid angsty little kid having a tantrum. You're no-one and you don't know shit."

I nearly drowned in all the irony.

The_King_Elessar said...

@GML - Have some of mine. I have ice cream anyway. As regards the 'quality' comment, that referred to *a) the layout (iirc, twas a while ago) and *b) some of the other member passive-aggressive behaviour and poor rules knowledge. (possibly not the former, I may be screwing with my memory based upon more recent events, if so, obviously, I apologise.)

@Hymirl, and anyone else who is advocating other tactics than blocking - Do/Have you play(ed) Fantasy??

As a final point - perhaps I misunderstood the thread. As I read it, it seemed to be a thread to discuss the merits of blocking in a vacuum.

If so, then alternatives are irrelevant. All it took was for the people arguing with Smurfy to say 'This is not a tactic I use often, but, yes, in 'x' circumstances it would of course be a great option if not automagically the best.' - Instead, they got argumentative. Or so it seemed to be, since I haven't read the previous thread where it started.

PS - If anything, Chumby is MY bf, thanks. LOL
No, but seriously, calling someone gay is too pathetic for words.

Oh, and so we're clear - I'm nowhere near done, I just want to know if you play Fantasy before I can make my point best. Not being a passive-aggressive asshole (all the time) I don't want to be so patronising that every word positively drips with bile, and you choose to ignore the kernel of brilliance beneath.

Brother Loring said...

Shut-up TKE, you homo.... if anything he's my BF!

The Wolf's Lunch said...

Oh joy! And to think I thought that ever since I left those pokemon forums about 5 years ago, I'd never see such classy ranting ever again. How wrong was I?!

Hy- wait, hold on can't remember your name already. Hymirl that's the one (strange name at that, although this IS the internet, so alas). Hymirl, first up you shouldn't even be considering judging someone after your display of what I shall dub as, 'superior argumentative skills and exceptionally impressive choice of languages'. Swearing on the internet is pointless, it just makes me subconsciously want to ignore your posts (almost did, had to force myself through a couple). Sure throwing the occasional one just for shits and giggles, but in arguments, 'leave your naughty shoes at the door' (Don't you love teachers?).

Blocking does work, and Eldar Vs Marines isn't the only example, it doesn't even have to involve tanks. Sure it won't always, but as was stated, the topic wasn't saying it will, it was saying to try it. Here's an example that actually happened (Oh no! Arguments using actually occurrences to get the point across! Heresy!) with my Tau against a friend's Dark Eldar. Now he 'pimps' his Archon with close combat upgrades, and he just happened to set his sites on hopping through my squads quite easily (meaning I couldn't shoot him). So I blocked him by feeding him one of my crisis squads (I have 3x2 of them and my Kroot had already died, although they did their human-err, alien shield job well enough already) so that the others could get far enough away to avoid his charge and shoot him to death (what a poor tactic I know, but you appear to throw it around with those lances anyhow). It worked and allowed me to table him as I could then just bounce around and pick off his stragglers that were crawling from their wrecked tanks (four railguns <3).

Before you cry 'I never said it didn't work', this entire mess was caused by people commenting with 'what if's in a topic that merely suggested something that can work (and does work in the way they suggested aswell.)

Just another thing that popped to mind aswell.

"BLs are brought in small numbers to slow heavy enemy armor" Said Kirby.
"Yes they are! And you know what bit of heavy armour you ought to try and slow with the bright lance? I'll give you a guess..." Chirped Hymirl

Here you suggest that instead of using Vypers to slow down the Raider, and blowing the support up with Brightlances (so much easier), that they should instead leave the support alive and slow down the Raider with the Lances? Or in other words, instead of slowing one thing down and killing the rest, kill one thing and get killed by the rest. Hardly seems like a good battle plan. Hope it works for you though, really, it's not that bad of a way to play...kinda.


Anonymous said...

@ King Elessar: If you read the thread from the start (and not from the post linked to in the previous blocking article) you will see that basically what people said was that it is a tactic that can be used but nothing to get overexcited about, it is a tactic like any other tactic, something to pull out when an opportunity arises, not the ultimate solution to Land Raiders.

As for WHFB, that is another game with different rules, many of them which lends themselves very well to different kinds of blocks, so not really a good comparison to WH40k.


The_King_Elessar said...

I did indeed read the article, and like I stated, they said far more than was required. The tone of the thread was overall one of 'Hey guys, help me demonstrate to Smurfy here why, although this IS a tactic that CAN be used, actually he's a fool for saying it like it was great or anything, when there's better stuff. I'm not going to suggest any better ideas...but I'm right, so chime in with support.'

Whether or not that was the intention, that was how I read it. I can't say with certainty I didn't read it with rose-tinted specs on, but I don't think I did. Either the thread was to discuss alternatives, in which case, some should have been posited, or it was ONLY to discus Blocking, in a vacuum - in which case, the other posts meet my definition of trolling, or indeed flamebaiting.


Also, while you are right, Fantasy is a very different system (inferior, and less complex/tactical* in fact) March Blocking is such a mind-numbingly obvious tactic in it, for obvious reasons - it would indeed be remiss to suggest (not that I'm saying you have) that the tactic is not very much a good option to obtain/retain in 40k.

Even in Fantasy, however, March Blocking is hardly the be-all and end-all of strategy. Sometimes it's worse than useless. Like in 40k.**

* - A topic for another time, and, methinks, place. Assuming there's any point. Discussing the merits of 7e at this point sees only trolling rose-tinters (phrase of the day, btw) [usually scrubs or Daemon players, shocker.] who think it's an incredible game/best WFB version ever etc, or apologists who think that the ruleset they haven't even yet seen makes whatever flaws 7e had irrelevant. Still - it's a conversation I heartily enjoy in person, when I can get someone to actually listen.

** - This is an example of how someone could have put across their dissent without any need for p-a negativity, or rudeness. Saying 'RAWR I Out5h00t5 EwE!!11!' or posturing ('Yeah, decent tactic, but I use better. No, I won't tell you what they are.') do not add anything, and only create tension.

There is a gulf between being blunt and being a dick. Given the seniority of the forum members involved, I would have expected a more tolerant approach to someone new at the place. Especially when it can doubtless be hard for people to acclimatise to a less abrasive atmosphere than Dakka/'Seer.

A little bit more forbearance, and maturity from the 'senior' members, in my view, would have headed this off at the Hot Gates, and we could have sat around making '300' gay jokes instead.

PS - That's pretty much my piece. Kirbs, I apologise for the whole 'going against you drawing a line under it' thing, but I didn't get in earlier, and like active dialogues. :p

In the interests of letting the blog authors return to their normal (yeah right!) lives and schedule, any responses can be emailed to me (address easy to find) or PM'd on 40kO (I think I have told it to email me in the event of a PM...)

The_King_Elessar said...

Longer Footnotes FTW.

Kirby said...

I should ban you :P.

The_King_Elessar said...

You're online now? Fine, I'm going to bed. :p

The_King_Elessar said...

Oh, and don't think I didn't notice you copy me...

Kirby said...

Good riddance! lol and when did I "copy" you this time ^^?

The_King_Elessar said...

Notable Article Page. :p

I've had mine for about 3 months.

Kirby said...

Oh haha. Next you're going to say pics were your idea. You're sounding like Darkwynn. "sorry 40k community for thinking up of mech IG on a site that barely gets mech."

Post a Comment

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...