Hi!
Thanks to ForgottenLore for proofreading the core book.
Robots have always been a little fiddly and confusing, time to sit down and see what I do with these.
Primarch
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Net Epic Core Rules Revision http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=25680 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | primarch [ Sat Aug 03, 2013 8:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Hi! This thread is for posting on anything related to the revision of the Core Rules Book. Those whom wish to supervise this list, please state so in your post and compile an editable document of the changes that are posted. Thank you! Primarch |
|
| Author: | The Bissler [ Tue Aug 20, 2013 8:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Something I had completely missed about Snap Fire in the rules: "Titan weapons that Snap Fire do not cause the Titan to count as having fired – the Titan may move and fire other weapons normally." I think this should be dropped. It unduly penalises Eldar Titans who - unless the excellent new Titan rules are being used - will rarely First Fire. And in the case of the new Titan rules are being used, it makes them far too powerful! In addition, I think it is open to abuse, there is nothing that indicates that Snap Fire can only be used once per turn (although I would assume that it is). |
|
| Author: | ForgottenLore [ Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
So, I've given you the list of typos and stuff i found proofreading the core book, and brought up my desire for some reorganization. Now I wanted to bring up the various areas of the rules that I was unclear on or that could use further explanation. The first thing I noticed was that there don't seem to be any reserve rules. Other than deep striking there doesn't seem to be any way to keep some of your army in reserve to come onto the field later in the game, and I was wondering, why? I remember back in the '90's when Space Marine 2nd came out, I loved the use of cards for army creation. You could lay out the cards like an "order of battle" table and reference then while reading the rules, it was cool. What I noticed with NetEpic, since it is an internet property, is that without physical cards to look at while reading, it was a bit harder to understand the army creation rules on the first pass. Therefore, I think a more detailed example is needed, with a sample chart from the back of one of the army books showing how the tables are laid out and used. (truthfully, since we don't have a physical product, I'm not sure it wouldn't make sense to just change the way army creation is described to not reference "cards" at all, and have the cards as a simple play aid instead of integral to the game, but I suspect that won't be a popular idea). On page 13, the rules for controlling objectives say having enemy units contest control is an optional rule, but page 42 treats that as the default. Units in transports can be given different orders than the transport itself, it should be clarified when those orders are to be revealed. p 15 has a roll to choose sides that is not named, then the text refers to an initiative roll. Later, on p17 the rules define a DIFFERENT roll as an initiative roll. The winner of the initiative roll (the 2nd kind of initiative) may choose a unit to move last in the turn. When is this choice made and his opponent informed is not specified. with the optional rules for command units on p17, does that mean you ARE giving command units orders? The description of unit coherency doesn't explain the issue of 2 separate groups, although the example in the box does cover that. It seems like there is supposed to be a to-hit penalty for pop-up attacks, but I can't find it. Is there one, or am I just confusing it with fire-on-fly? the rules for deep striking say that tunnelers are included there, but there is a whole big section with different rules for tunnelers right next to that box. While we're on the subject, the rules for tunnelers in general are fairly confusing On page 23, under Hit and Run, the last sentence says "If the unit decides to leave combat it will be pinned normally later in the turn." Is this trying to say that if a hot and run unit hits and then runs but is later charged by someone else that they will be pinned? or is it saying something else? The special rules for flyers reference the special rules for floaters, that should probably be reworded to not do that. As near as I can tell, the alternate rules for floaters needlessly repeat the altitude definitions from the previous page. except that the second definition of high altitude has the line "Landing flyers do not receive this range bonus." What? how is a plane at high altitude landing? The alternate rules for flyers say that landed flyers may claim objectives. Really? A grounded dropship with no troops inside can secure an objective? that doesn't seem right, and the regular, non-alternate rules for flyers say they obey the same rules as floaters, which can't claim objectives. The rules indicate that flyers cannot shoot at other flyers, only engage them in close combat (dogfighting) is that correct? The "Only Standard Transports are Free" box doesn't actually seem to be adding any extra rules, just emphasizing how the existing rules for army creation and coherency apply to transports. This is a good example of why I think the "special rules" boxes should be integrated into the main text, or am I missing something? The terrain definition for Rivers and Lakes. Is this trying to say that you only need to represent very deep bodies of water because most vehicles are at least temporarily amphibious? Trenches have a requirement to "move through them". Does this mean trying to cross over them? what about moving along them? the text doesn't say. Bunkers say they "protect up to two infantry and light artillery", is this supposed to be 2 infantry and/or, or is it meant to be 2 of each? The explanation of intact buildings rambles a bit. I have read it 3 times now and am still not entirely sure how they are supposed to work. on p 33, the example of LoS, the various stands in the picture should be labeled (A,B,C, etc...) the table in p34 says floaters have 180 degree arc of fire, the text for floaters (and flyers) earlier said 360. Are skimmers always considered to be aerial targets for AA, or only when they deep strike, the text is ambiguous. The rules for the HQ special ability say they apply to template weapons. How does that work?can you make a detachment virtually immune to templates just by placing a few HQ units scattered among them? For side and rear shots, it needs to be clearer what classes of units suffer from the rule. What classes are "larger". Listing them would probably be the best option. The "Healers are not Gods" rule on p37 needs more clarification. Is it 5 healing attempts per stand with Medic (or Mechanic)? I think the confusion here is because someone new to the game is not going to know in what form healers are added to an army, are they a single stand that is added to a detachment, a unit of healers in and of themselves? What? The Multiple Wound box on p38 seems to be talking more about regeneration than multiple wounds. With Combat Engineers, when are their orders revealed? In the orders phase? in the move phase? It would be REALLY nice if we could come up with a different name for either scatter dice or titan scatter dice. I don't know what, but hiving those two rolls have basically the same name is confusing. The rules for Titan damage reference a shot hitting the hull, what does that mean? the rules don't seem to mention it. When I titan falls over due to leg damage, how tall is it supposed to be (ie, how far from the titan's base are units in danger)? The special ability reference on page 50 should include page number references for those rules The summary of the medic and mechanic rules in that table imply that the healer roll REPLACES a units regular armor save. I don't think that is what is intended, but am not sure. Either way, it needs clarification in the text. Just a nitpick, as a Tau player, having psychic attacks called Ethereal is very distracting, Ethereals aren't psychic. I know that wasn't a problem when Space Marine came out, but it makes me do a double take every time now (and is pretty funny). Is regeneration a 1 time roll per wound or can you keep rolling every turn? If the later, is there a way to permanently kill a regenerator other than stationing someone to keep shooting it every turn? The write up for the example cards on p57 says the original Space Marine card is for a veteran company, when what it shows is a tactical company. Wow, that was a lot more than I thought it would be, but I think that is almost everything in the rules that I found even remotely confusing. |
|
| Author: | yorkie [ Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Having a read through, im totally confused by how robots work. |
|
| Author: | Irisado [ Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Thanks for going through all of this Forgotten Lore. Spotting and fixing these oversights is really helpful. yorkie wrote: Having a read through, im totally confused by how robots work. The rules for them were not all that clear in SM2 either, so there would be no harm in looking at these again. Perhaps bring this up in one of the army list discussions? |
|
| Author: | yorkie [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 8:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Well, wasnt sure where to post the question as several Imperial armies have access to them. Ive re-read the rules for robots and..nope...I still dont get it. Also how come they are cheaper in the IG list than in the SM list, as they are exactly the same. |
|
| Author: | primarch [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Hi! Thanks to ForgottenLore for proofreading the core book. Robots have always been a little fiddly and confusing, time to sit down and see what I do with these. Primarch |
|
| Author: | The Bissler [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Apologies Forgotten Lore, I don't know how I managed to miss your post, but I did. That really is excellent work and thank you again for taking the time to do such a thorough readthrough and to provide your observations on the book. I know that doing so must have taken a considerable amount of time so wanted to express my appreciation doing so. On a minor point, re the scatter dice naming problem, how about we keep the name of Scatter Dice for the die with the arrows & hit/target on it? To be clear that's the one used for indirect barrages and the like. For the dice used for scatter on Titan hit locations, how about "Target Dice" or "Pinpoint Accuracy Dice"? Admittedly the latter doesn't exactly roll off the tongue!
|
|
| Author: | primarch [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
The Bissler wrote: Apologies Forgotten Lore, I don't know how I managed to miss your post, but I did. That really is excellent work and thank you again for taking the time to do such a thorough readthrough and to provide your observations on the book. I know that doing so must have taken a considerable amount of time so wanted to express my appreciation doing so. On a minor point, re the scatter dice naming problem, how about we keep the name of Scatter Dice for the die with the arrows & hit/target on it? To be clear that's the one used for indirect barrages and the like. For the dice used for scatter on Titan hit locations, how about "Target Dice" or "Pinpoint Accuracy Dice"? Admittedly the latter doesn't exactly roll off the tongue! Hi! Actually the old wording can be used, its that in the re-write a lot gets lost. Artillery scatter dice (dice with arrows and the "on target" hit) Hit location dice (dice with the up/down, left/right for hit location templates) Hopefully I'll be less lazy this time around.  Primarch |
|
| Author: | Mattman [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
I always call the dice used for titans, the "up-down" dice  Matt |
|
| Author: | primarch [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Mattman wrote: I always call the dice used for titans, the "up-down" dice Matt Hi! Bwahhaha! I say one thing for this, you can confuse them with anything else by that moniker. Primarch |
|
| Author: | Mattman [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
With regards to robots, I think the programming rules should be scrapped. Maybe just do something as simple as, they only get orders on a 4+. But then we could borrow the rules for the squat robot command vehicle and apply them to other armies. Maybe not a vehicle, but something like a techmarine, which is added to the formation and as long as he is within X cm of the unit they can have orders as normal, if not they only get orders on a 4+. Hell you could even say that if you roll a 1, the enemy gets control of them for the turn. Matt |
|
| Author: | The Bissler [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
primarch wrote: Actually the old wording can be used, its that in the re-write a lot gets lost. Artillery scatter dice (dice with arrows and the "on target" hit) Hit location dice (dice with the up/down, left/right for hit location templates) Yes! I forgot that was what they were called! Nice one! Mattman wrote: I always call the dice used for titans, the "up-down" dice Also known as the optimist-pessimist dice.
|
|
| Author: | primarch [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Mattman wrote: With regards to robots, I think the programming rules should be scrapped. Maybe just do something as simple as, they only get orders on a 4+. But then we could borrow the rules for the squat robot command vehicle and apply them to other armies. Maybe not a vehicle, but something like a techmarine, which is added to the formation and as long as he is within X cm of the unit they can have orders as normal, if not they only get orders on a 4+. Hell you could even say that if you roll a 1, the enemy gets control of them for the turn. Matt Hi! I like this, simple and to the point. Perhaps a set of "instinctual" (programmed) reactions when not in order radius. No orders, will execute one of the following: 1. Remain stationary and Fire at closest formation OR 2. Charge the closest formation On a roll of 1 a serious malfunction occurs and the robot is disabled. It must be repaired by the techmarine or be removed as a casualty. Thoughts? Primarch |
|
| Author: | ForgottenLore [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Net Epic Core Rules Revision |
Regarding the Titan Scatter Dice, I think I like Target or Targeting Dice. Easy to say, does a reasonable job of being descriptive. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|