WestRider

I was poking at the math, and two Trygons Charging one at the same time have a decent chance of taking it down before it kills both of them. If you're Charging the Trygons in one at a time, you're probably going to want three of them. Given that two Trygons are slightly more expensive than a single Knight, and the Knight is faster, more resilient to most shooting, and has far better Firepower, that seems kind of off.

I'm not saying that's how you should do it, I'm just taking potshots at GW's Rules Writing ;) Really, the thing should just be Barrage.

The problem is that Buildings are treated as Vehicles for most purposes, and when drawing LoS for Vehicle-mounted Weapons, you need to draw it not just from the weapon, but in line with the weapon. There's the 45 degree arc thing, but basically by strict RAW, those Missiles can only fire at things more or less directly above the Building :P

The general consensus I've seen is to treat them as "unusual Power Weapons", so just the user's Strength and AP3. It's an open question, tho, which will hopefully get resolved when the Ork Dex gets redone.

They included the Warlord and there was some Victory Condition that made them worth a ton of points, so it made sense to hide. They almost lost the Game because of the Bunker finally getting breached.

They explode big time, but only once all HP are gone. 6s on the Damage Table just make that happen sooner by stripping more HP. It's the same for all Super-Heavies.

Glances take off a Hull Point (they have 6), just like on everything else. Other damage results do nothing, except for Explodes, which takes an extra d3 HP off.

3++ Just ran a BatRep with the Librarius Formation. They sat in a Void Shielded Bunker and did nothing, as 24" with limited arcs of fire isn't actually very much of a threat area on an Apoc table.

#1 seems clearly wrong, given that Pg.96 specifies that each Weapon targets the nearest Enemy Unit, which can easily be different. It is, however, still one Building, so #3 actually seems to be the correct way to go about it to me. It's how I've been playing my FSR, tho it's never actually come up yet. I also chose #3 as the option that gives me the least advantage, going with Jervis's Razor, which is one of the few really good things he's come up with.

Yeah, I ended up getting like $5 each for my Epic IG Tanks, and that was low balling it. There's actually a pretty good market for this stuff. Totally wishing I had cash to burn right now. My AT boxed set got lost in a move years and years ago, and I far prefer the old-style Warlords to the new blockier ones.

And the Mortis gets Skyfire and Interceptor when stationary, right? The ForgeFiend doesn't get those.

Is apparently happening on Saturday. According to the Eddas, the mortal survivors will have sheltered in a wood, so this might be a good weekend to go camping.

I was actually talking about the pic on Page 1 of this thread. Which was obviously painted after the Cygnar scheme existed. But the timing isn't really important for the purposes of my statement, just the fact that the similarity has more to do with paint jobs than the actual model.

As much as anything, I think it's just that the paint scheme on that one is so close to the Cygnar colour Scheme. I find the others far less like Warjacks, just because of the paint job.

Yeah, some sort of satin finish is probably better than a full gloss.

Using some degree of gloss finish can also really help black colour schemes pop if used carefully. Matte black on the "skin" parts and gloss on the armour plates, perhaps. Easy to overdo it, tho.

So, a friend of mine (shadesofmauve on tumblr) decided that Krogan kids (Mass Effect) made friends the same way that goat kids do: with headbutts.

About time we got a proper replacement for that clunky metal one. Not that I actually need any more at this point, but for the people who don't already have 8 or 9, it's nice. I'll be curious to see how easy it is to mix this with the Loyalist Dread kit. I kind of like the partially corrupted look.

Again, not 100% on this, but I seem to remember a chunk about the Dictionary Attacks including combinations of words, specifically to attack passphrases like that. So no, "peanutCarsGirlMagnet" wouldn't be in there, but "peanut", "Cars", "Girl", and "Magnet" each would, and that combination of the four would get checked at some point.

It helps, but "dictionary" in this case refers to a hacker-compiled dictionary, not an "official" one, and they often include common miss-spellings and substitutions like using a 0 in place of an o. There are also partial dictionary attacks that use some wildcard characters. Fluger's suggestions are good against any method I know as long as you get them up above about 9-10 characters (8 characters is brute-forceable with current tech, and 9-10 probably will be before too long). Including at least one special character probably helps. Other tips: - The first character is the most common place to put a capital letter. Put one somewhere else. If using real words, put a capital somewhere in the middle of a word. - Similarly, the last character is the most common place to put special characters. Put one somewhere else. Again, good to toss one in the middle of a real word if you're using them. - Four letters followed by four numbers is very common, and those combos are often checked first. Particularly avoid runs of four numbers corresponding to years in the last hundred years or so (1964, etc.), lots of people use those. - If you're using something that you won't remember trivially, write it down, but keep it somewhere other than your computer desk or other sensitive documents. The most secure way to go is with password management software, but that involves its own hassles and costs money and some people don't want to deal with that.

Once again, as I usn Once again, as I understand it, the problem with this approach is that the number of possible English words that can fit in 6 characters is a far smaller space than the total number of permutations of upper and lower case letters. Dictionary attacks take advantage of this by running all the combinations that are actual words first, which is a fairly quick process as these things go. I'm not a cryptologist, but I remember reading an article a while back on password security where they managed to arrange to get together with three hackers to demonstrate how these things got cracked, and all three said and showed that passwords based on real words were among the easiest to crack. I believe that XKCD strip was actually brought up and used as a bad example, but it was a while ago, that may have been in the commentary or just my own comparison.

Isn't that really vulnerable to Dictionary Attacks, tho?

I always kind of wanted to do one with Abaddon's sword replaced with a Pop-Tart, so it was Drach-Nyan.

I was thinking swap all three Muties for a pair of Oblits. The extra damage they do on the landing Turn should offset the reduction in Target Saturation somewhat.