What is missing from the E-A rules? |
dafrca
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:45 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm Posts: 10956 Location: Burbank, CA, USA
|
Although I agree with Maksim in his overall observation that the rules have been simplified when it comes to "fluff" and "extras." There has been a cleaning out of the fluff. I believe his dramatization of the Orks and their changes is overdone.
The Orks are the only army in our eight member group to have never lost a game. SM, IG, Eldar, and Bugs have all lost more than once. Only the Orks have seemed to always take the field. This makes me question just how poor is the army. Between the availability of their smaller cheap formations and the neverending airstrike formation, I would not say they are weak by any means. Lack fluff? Yes, all of them do now. Weak, no.
Dafrca
_________________ "Every Man is a But Spark in the Darkness" - Cities of Death, page 59
Come fight me, if you dare...... http://dd-janks.mybrute.com
|
|
Top |
|
 |
MaksimSmelchak
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:06 am |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 4:43 pm Posts: 7258 Location: Sacramento, California, USA
|
Dafrca,
Although I agree with Maksim in his overall observation that the rules have been simplified when it comes to "fluff" and "extras." There has been a cleaning out of the fluff. I believe his dramatization of the Orks and their changes is overdone. |
We can agree to diagree. No big deal. It wouldn't be the first time either that I had OVERDONE something!
The fluff and detail level has dropped ramatically to make the game a smoother running game along Epic-40k lines. My impression is that Jervis has been allowing as little detail as he can in order to keep the Epic-40k engine as close to what it was as possible and still please the fans. That's his choice and I can respect it even if I don't care much for it.
As far as dramatization goes, I don't think it's overstated one iota that the Orks are very inferior to how they were when the first set of playset rules came out. In some ways they improved and others they became diminished.
I desired to see Orks play differently than they did in Epic-40k where Orks had one strategy - rush forward and overwhelm the enemy. That strategy became tiring for me after awhile, but nothing else worked even close to as well as the basic Ork strategy. Que sera, sera!
In the beginning sets of playtest rules, the Orks played like more than a "rush-forward-to-overwhelm-them" kind of army, which I really liked. By the latest edition of the E-A rules, they're back to being a hoard army.
The Orks are the only army in our eight member group to have never lost a game. SM, IG, Eldar, and Bugs have all lost more than once. Only the Orks have seemed to always take the field. This makes me question just how poor is the army. Between the availability of their smaller cheap formations and the neverending airstrike formation, I would not say they are weak by any means. Lack fluff? Yes, all of them do now. Weak, no. |
I don't think I called them weak in these posts, but "diminished." My statement regarding Orks in E-A is that versus experienced SM and IG players, the Orks should win well under half the time. Until IG and SM players learn how to exploit the Ork weaknesses, the Orks should win quite often. As soon as the Ork weaknesses become known, the limited nature of the Ork lists should ensure that Orks lose very often much like older lists do in 25mm 40k. ?
I look at the tactic of using as many minimal Ork formations as possible to be a way of breaking the system. I always played theme armies with some balance. So did my SM and IG opponents.
-----------------------------------------
In the end of ends, none of my kvetching (complaining) really matters since I want to play with my 6mm Epic minis and I want to do it with others like Dafrca. I'll play E-A, no problem, understanding its' shortcomings.
Thanks for the feedback, Dafrca! ?
Best regards to everyone,
Maksim-Smelchak.
P.S.
Dafrca, let me know when you receive our last trade items, please. I'll do what I can to make sure that you are a satisfied trade partner.
Top |
|
 |
Legion 4
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:34 am |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36989 Location: Ohio - USA
|
Well,
I hope in the final copy, the army lists will work out, for all your sakes. ?
We will continue to use our existing TO&Es regardless. ?
The indirect fire rules is the main weakness, but again this is my opinion.
We will continue to use the modified SM1 system. ?
Happy Gaming, no matter what rules you use. ?
_________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
|
|
Top |
|
 |
nealhunt
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:23 pm |
|
Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
Maksim: I think some of the points you make don't apply to the latest stuff.
- Stompas
They are exactly what you want - tough fire support. They have 2 big gunz and Reinforced Armor, with optional CC. AFAIK, they have always been 50 points.
- Ork Warlord - It looks like he was eliminated.
The Warlord upgrade in most formations was scrapped in favor of much-improved nobz. The Warboss/Big Boss upgrade that comes with an ork force is still there.
- New limits on Ork formation size x2 or x3 also appear to be in place.
There is no limit on formation size, except for aircraft. They can buy the core formations at x2 or x3 size and cost because it's cheaper than buying each unit individually. Or did you mean something else?
- Orks lost most of their fluff rules.
They get "mob up" bonuses. They get wildly diverse formations. They get a Warboss. They get bonuses for charging into combat in a Waaagh-like fashion. That covers Orkiness pretty well, imho. What rules are you referring to?
>> As soon as the Ork weaknesses become known, the limited nature of the Ork lists...
*boggle* Limited? The only limitations are Oddboyz, Supastompas, and the total points on WE/Aircraft. Outside of your personal preference for Supastompas, how does any of that limit strategic choices? Aside from a very non-orky stand-and-deliver force, you can build anything you want.
======== Some other stuff...
>> By the latest edition of the E-A rules, they're back to being a hoard army.
I don't understand what you mean by "back to..a horde." They've always been "the green hordes." I understand you may not like it, but it certainly fits the background.
- BFs with variable weapon loads - The old 0-1 limits apply to Oddboyz upgrades and SupaStompas now.
I agree you should be able to get more than one upgrade for the soopagunz (BFs and Big Gunz upgrade) and Painboyz (nobz upgrade). The Zapp gunz are too powerful. I doubt most opponents would object as long as you kept it reasonable. I would suggest you field your Pulsa Rokkits as Oddboyz Big Gunz so they have templates.
- Ork Bommas
This would be nice, but I don't think its absence hurts the Orks. Ork airpower is wicked.
- Gunwagons, Battlewagons, Gun Trukks, etc. - All of the other thinhs have been combined
Were stats for lungburstas, gutrippas, ad infinitum, different enough to bother with, even in SM2? I never thought so, even for fluff.
========
None of that was intended to be abrasive. You have my apologies if it came across as such.
_________________ Neal
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Legion 4
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:50 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36989 Location: Ohio - USA
|
Well, like I said, much of E-A is still "under construction", it appears, regardless of the fact that they said the rule book was headed to the printer (?).
The dicussion on the FA topic showed Jervis was still making changes (?). ?
So, I imagine the final copy will come with an errata sheet or pamphlet (?). ?
I'm glad we use our own "hybrid" rules and only adding a few things from E-A like modified Flak rules and maybe even the ranged combat system?
My buddy is going to Games Day US this weekend, (besides getting me some F/W Epic Night Spinners and possibly some other new Epic F/W (?) ), he is going see if he can get any new intell on E-A. ?
Anything worth noting, I'll let you all know... ?
_________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
|
|
Top |
|
 |
nealhunt
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:03 pm |
|
Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
It's not at the printers. ?
It's with the editors getting print-ready, and doing the (supposedly) final draft. ?
Printing isn't supposed to start until September, IIRC.
_________________ Neal
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Legion 4
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:14 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36989 Location: Ohio - USA
|
Well, That's good, but that is also why I put a (?). Because I've said this many times before, after 12+ years of "Epic'ing", I'm a "cold zero" realist - until I have something in my hands, it's in the realm of Nessie, Big Foot, Roswell etc. ?
Again, G/W is "artist driven" so style always - I say again - Always - supersedes function and form. ?
You'd think G/W was run by females!!! ?
Albeit quite rich females!!! 
_________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
|
|
Top |
|
 |
MaksimSmelchak
|
Post subject: What is missing from the E-A rules? Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:29 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 4:43 pm Posts: 7258 Location: Sacramento, California, USA
|
Neal,
Originally I wasn;'t going to respond, not out of being offended (Dafrca and Neal are both gentlemen of the highest caliber), but because I'm not sure how much this topic could add to the forum other than adding my gripes and dissatisfaction about E-A.
On the other hand, maybe someone will prove me wrong, which I'm all for!
Maksim: ?I think some of the points you make don't apply to the latest stuff. |
OK, Point taken. I'll stand corrected!
- Stompas They are exactly what you want - tough fire support. ?They have 2 big gunz and Reinforced Armor, with optional CC. ?AFAIK, they have always been 50 points. |
I think what I mentioned before is that while Stompas are still OK, they were once MUCH BETTER. They were a real threat to enemy armor, even Land Raiders. Now, in a Stompa vs. LR combat, I'd put money on the LR unless the Stompa can get close (not very likely unless the terrain favors the Stompa).
Stompas are tough fire support, but with only two Big Gunz, they are woefully under armed if they're to oppose enemy armor. Two 5+ shots means roughly 1/3 of the time, it's hitting. Pretty pitiful and this is before negative modifiers.
- Ork Warlord - It looks like he was eliminated.
The Warlord upgrade in most formations was scrapped in favor of much-improved nobz. The Warboss/Big Boss upgrade that comes with an ork force is still there.
He is a character and a supreme commander and the point about Nobz is a good one. Shedding BMs is great. I concede on this point.
- New limits on Ork formation size x2 or x3 also appear to be in place.
There is no limit on formation size, except for aircraft. ?They can buy the core formations at x2 or x3 size and cost because it's cheaper than buying each unit individually. ?Or did you mean something else?
Big Warbands and ?Uge Warbands: An Ork player can choose to double or triple the number of units in the Ork warband if he wishes. A warband with double the normal number of core units is called a Big Wareband and costs double the number of points. A warband with three times as many units as a normal warband is called a ?Uge Warband and costs three times the normal number of points.
I put a quote under your comments, Neal. I wouldn't be surprised if the part about Big Warbands and ?Uge Warbands is intended to be a limit set by Jervis. It definittely needs clarification.
- Orks lost most of their fluff rules.
They get "mob up" bonuses. ?They get wildly diverse formations. ?They get a Warboss. ?They get bonuses for charging into combat in a Waaagh-like fashion. ?That covers Orkiness pretty well, imho. ?What rules are you referring to?
These are the rules that they still have:
SPECIAL RULE: Power Of The Waaargh
SPECIAL RULE: Mob Rule
SPECIAL RULE: Ork Power Fields
The wildly diverse formations is good, but I refered to it as being a "broken concept" in my rules since some Ork players are using it that way.
Waaargh is better than it used to be (includes flyers now).
I miss the extra BM for the clangor of Ork fire. That was one of the rules that made tackling SMs much more manageable.
>> As soon as the Ork weaknesses become known, the limited nature of the Ork lists...
*boggle* Limited? The only limitations are Oddboyz, Supastompas, and the total points on WE/Aircraft. ?Outside of your personal preference for Supastompas, how does any of that limit strategic choices? Aside from a very non-Orky stand-and-deliver force, you can build anything you want.
Orks have a very limited number of units compared to SM or IG forces. This translates into a limited number of combinations, which is a liability in a list-based sytem. Look at 25mm 40k.
Aside from a very non-Orky stand-and-deliver force, you can build anything you want.
You can build just about anything you want, but they're all going to function just about the same: "Rush forward in a hoard and hope to overwhelm the enemy." This will work until IG and SM players wizen up and realize that Orks have one real strategy. Then SM and IG players should defeat Orks well over half of the time.
I find "Rush forward in a hoard and hope to overwhelm the enemy" to be a little limited and boring. It's one of the reasons I didn't care for the Orks in Epic-40k. They got slaughtered almost every game, even the ones that they won. I realize that the game is supposed to be balanced meaning that both sides will inflict and take casualties, but it always seemed well against the Orks even when the VPs indicated otherwise.
Having Orks that could "stand-and-deliver" was a welcome change. I was really pasting the SMs with tougher formations up until the Orks became so diminished from their first go.
Of course, it is perfectly Orky and GW-y to have lame and limited Orks. SMs are supposed to be the centerpiece of the game. That's why they have more choices, units, and most everything else (except the Red Wuns Dat Go Faster! Of course, Blood Angels do have supercharged vehciles so I guess SM Red Wunz DO go faster!). ?
>> By the latest edition of the E-A rules, they're back to being a hoard army.
I don't understand what you mean by "back to..a horde." ?They've always been "the green hordes." ?I understand you may not like it, but it certainly fits the background.
I mean by "hoard army" is that they're beginning to play exactly like they did in Epic-40k.
You're right, it certainly fits into the background. The Orks come in huge waves that are eventually whittled down so that the Imperial forces can win yet again!
- BFs with variable weapon loads
- The old 0-1 limits apply to Oddboyz upgrades and SupaStompas now.
BFs with variable weapon loads was the best thing since sliced bread. I'll miss them. SOB, SOB!
I agree you should be able to get more than one upgrade for the soopagunz (BFs and Big Gunz upgrade) and Painboyz (nobz upgrade). ?The Zapp gunz are too powerful. ?I doubt most opponents would object as long as you kept it reasonable. ?I would suggest you field your Pulsa Rokkits as Oddboyz Big Gunz so they have templates.
I'd rather have Pulsas than making Big Gunz with my single Oddboy upgrade into Pulsas. It's a good suggestion though! Thanks!
- Ork Bommas:
This would be nice, but I don't think its absence hurts the Orks. ?Ork airpower is wicked.
Try using Ork airpower to stop Imperial bombers. It's not easy.
Ork airpower works pretty well in the ground attack role. The Bommas were even better. They were also of the few new Ork units too! Of course, it has been hinted that they'll be back later (they're apparently suffering from not having a sculpt yet).
- Gunwagons, Battlewagons, Gun Trukks, etc. - All of the other things have been combined:
Were stats for Lungburstas, Gutrippas, ad infinitum, different enough to bother with, even in SM2? I never thought so, even for fluff.
Let's agree to diagree. I think that variety is the spice of life. It makes more combinations possible for a list-based system and keeps my opponenets guessing.
None of that was intended to be abrasive. ?You have my apologies if it came across as such.
No worries, mate! I'm good if you are too!
Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.
I don't think I said that the Orks were the only army that has lost out with rule set revisions. However, as a playtester who finally wanted to see Orks get a nice "face lift," I've felt the Ork losses the most.
>> You can build just about anything you want, but they're all going to function just about the same.
I disagree that it's all the same, but I don't think we will get anywhere on this topic. I will point out that limitations on Ork tactics are due to their command, not their force construction. - Neil
OK. I welcome you to come visit me and play a game to prove me wrong. I'll happily stand corrected, Neil!
All in all, I think E-A will be a fine game, but I really miss the great stuff that might never come to be now like the BFs with variable weapon loads and the Ork Bommas.
I'm really hoping to get a chance to play with all of you guys, Signius, Dafrca, Neil, Primarch, Tuffskull, and the rest of the gang.
Maksim-Smelchak.