To quote the (as of yet unreleased) first line of EPIC: Total War: "War isn't fair."  

But a wargame needs to be fair enough to be fun for all participants.  If you want to try other scenarios, please give the Total War ones a spin, some are quite a bit different from the "Tournament Scenario" opening up a lot of new challenges.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

The suggestion is that a little tweak to the tournament scenario (marching troops cannot take objectives) improves the scenario.

Obviously we can make up new and wacky scenarios, but the suggestion is to tweak the tournament rulesset.

I note that everyone who has actually tried playing with "marching troops may not take objectives" prefers it that way.

I prefer the rule as it is,even after I starting playing in a group that thought marching stopped a formation from holding objectives.

I don't see how it could be seen as unrealistic game wise,it's more unrealistic to have an overview of the entire table and be capable of seeing everything thats going on in the game even in areas where you have no troops.

There's too much emphasis put on what the God like General(the player) sees and not on what the formations on the ground would see and think.

As an example,to me the troops on the ground wouldn't know that a  Land speeder/Rough Rider/Stormboy etc. had Marched to claim their blitz objective,they would just see their supply route had been cut off,how long had they had to prepare and were there more enemy troops nearby ready to ambush them.

I am happy with the march rule as it stands regarding objectives too.

I'm also happy that the -1 to hit is enough of a minus to the double move too.

Just to get my 2 cents down for the record.

Not true. We played it that way for a few games by mistake. I much prefer the taking of objectives with a March.

I will play whatever rules get decided however. I am not going to blame the rules for a loss.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

For me it's about time slices mostly. But that you all know.  
That is, I feel you get to much done in Double and especially March.

And then, for the usual game, the pick-up or competition, there's only the tournament, meeting engagement, one. I applaud works as TW and hope to run some of them, or the like, in our up-coming campaign.
But the majority of all games is that Tournament Game. And thus that "is" EA.
And I can argue the senselessness of capture objectives on March all day long. The scenario is written as it is, it's a core rule, and it will not change. Shouldn't even change perhaps, to keep that first part of a big game viable... Easily accessible and well endorsed rules.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

I don't recall lots of dash-to-objective play, at least not to the extent that it hinders my enjoyment of the game.

There are a lot of advantages to keeping a coherent battle line in place.  Going through it or around it to take objectives is tough.  I find it rare that there is a lot of mad-dash on turn 3.  Usually, that only happens when one force is substantially dominant, so that 1) the opponent is fragmented enough the opportunity exists, and 2) the dominant player can afford to divert troops to that kind of activity.

Sure, it happens, but when it does I just chalk it up to the losing army saying "dang, we're being outflanked all over the place... the command center is about to be overrun... bug out."

_________________
Neal

It reminds me a bit like chess, mid to end game. Queens, Knights, Bishops etc zipping around all over the place through the holes in the line.

it's disparate and exciting stuff. I love it!

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]