Tactical Command | View topic

Page 3 of 7

[ 104 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Dropship update!

pixelgeek

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:23 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 17 2005 July,00:36)

I think the current Eldar stuff pretty much sets the maximum for airpower. Anyhting going beyond them would have to be looked at carefully.

Anything concrete that you are specifically worried about?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Top

pixelgeek

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:25 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (Tas @ 17 2005 July,00:10)

I frequently conduct exercises against modern combat aircraft and maintai that the above hodls true.

I'm not sure that Imperial, Ork and Chaos aircraft are "modern". I'd only really place that adjective on Tau and Eldar aircraft. Hence their increased performance

Did you play any of the older versions of th Epic:A aircraft rules? I always thought that the more abstract rules were a bit boring.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Top

pixelgeek

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:35 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (Legion 4 @ 17 2005 July,07:41)

Yes, Tas's points are very valid, and both he and I have "real world" experience with CAS.

Well "real world" experience is a nice thing but ultimately you're talking about a game and one of the criteria for a game ( as opposed to a simulation) is that it be fun to play. I played SPI's Air War with a friend and while I am sure it was more realistic than "Bommas over da Sulpha Riva" it was dead boring and took forever to play. Not that Bommas was a great game either but if I was forced to play one over the other I wouldn't be playing Air War

I'm not knocking realism but I think that some of the earlier rules were more realistic but less interesting to play. In fact some of them were so boring we played without aircraft.

G/W's rules guys are no where near as "good" as AH's, SPI, etc.

Fair enough. Andy Chambers isn't James Dunnigan but whose company is still in business? And whose games are still on the market? In the end these are still "games" and they need to be fun to play.

G/W wants to appease the kids that buy their games and makes up some silly, unrealistic(?) rules to sell more models/toys.

Well thats a nice general rant about GW but I don't think it applies to the current discussion. In fact Epic:A had aircraft rules much more similar to what you are describing but they were... well dull. And, as I have said, who wants to play a game with dulll rules.

As well, this is all a bit moot since the air system is up for fairly significant review and as I mentioned previously you can and should send suggestions regarding the air rules if you find them deficient.

plus their obsession with making 40K and Epic comparable, etc

In what way?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Top

dafrca

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:04 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA

Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,09:35)

plus their obsession with making 40K and Epic comparable, etc

In what way?

Sorry to Hijack this thread, but ?

PG and any one else who has been on the playtest board for more then a short while knows what is meant by that comment. Many people, both GW staff and just plain fans have made many choices based not on what makes sense for Epic, but rather what is important to 40k. PG you know your own views on Robots were rejected, not because they were not good, but because the 40k team ?does not want Robots, well except Necrons??.

The fact is, if I played a WWII Skirmish game I would expect the feel of any particular army to be different then when I played a tactical game. Further, I would expect an army to feel even more different if I played a campaign wide game. At GW they work hard, sometimes too hard, to make sure that the Epic army does not have any different feel then the 40k army. Oddly they make a point in the fluff of telling of the multitude of variations that exist and then force all IG to play the same etc.

In fact to bring this slightly back to topic, the whole Flyer issue began because they had to follow the fluff that the 40k was doing right then, remember? We had to base the army lists on Armageddon. Limited Airpower says the fluff in 40k, so Epic had to follow.

OK, enough of a rant.

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

pixelgeek

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:26 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (dafrca @ 17 2005 July,12:04)

PG you know your own views on Robots were rejected, not because they were not good, but because the 40k team ?does not want Robots, well except Necrons??.

I didn't want to respond without being sure what in particualr was being said. Its a pretty big topic with a lot of related but divergent issues.

Part of my issue requiring clarification is that I don't particularly think that we need to be beholden to 40K fluff (especially when there are so many areas not explored in the background for a game of Epic's scale) but also because I don't think Jervis in particular is that fixated with the fluff. Perhaps its because he has seen it change so often to fit the whims of the current 40K design team?

Are Necrons robots? Aren't they filled with the spirits of the dead?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:51 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

I agree with PG, the old epic air rules were more realistic... but very dull. Having all your arty off table is also more realistic... but also dull.

I am curious PG when you mean the air system is up for 'fairly significant review' what exactly do you mean? I thought all that was up for discussion at present was the +1 to hit on intercept/cap orders modification?

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

pixelgeek

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:57 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (Markconz @ 17 2005 July,12:51)

I am curious PG when you mean the air system is up for 'fairly significant review' what exactly do you mean? I thought all that was up for discussion at present was the +1 to hit on intercept/cap orders modification?

The Rules Review committee started with that small suggestion and it lead to some more expanded suggestions by committee members.

I'm not sure if it will go anywhere but there is a, I think, significant majority of people that feel that the aircraft and flak rules need a rewite to make them simpler to use and more balanced.

I can't get into specifics since nothing has been confirmed as being suggested as an experimental rule yet

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Top

Legion 4

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:13 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA

Well Daf answered as I would have about 40K vs. Epic ... he and I usually agree ! ?And I agree in that I generally like the E:A rules, much better than E40K and I like FA on the board too. ?So I think (?) most of us agree. ?Oh, and I have 9 Robot Dets. (both metal & plastic ! Plus Chaos Androids ! )

?The point about realism/game vs.simulation, etc., etc., is an old story, however, Tas and my "threshold" for reality vs. a fun game, etc. will be different than yours P/G, based on a number of things. So, like we always on this site "Do what works for" ! ?As for AH, SPI, etc., IMO, most buy G/W models cause they are very good ... their rules system are secondary ... of course I have 9+ Epic armies so I'm an example of that ! ? :laugh:

?Plus dozens of AH's, SPI's etc. ... ?I'm eclectic like that ! :;):

?I too think the Tau followed by the Eldar are the most hi-tech/"modern" armies on the board, most of the rest are just hi-tech WWII, but I've said that before. ?And I like that paradigm ... ? As far as my "rant" on G/W, that was not my intention, I like most of E:A, and as I said have many/most of the Epic models, from all eras ... ?I look forward to any rule updates on the E:A system but so far most of E:A (@85%) works for me ! ?Don't take offense P/G, my opinion is just mine and means nothing ... "Do what works for you" ... ?And on our gaming table we're going to play Epic as we like, regardless ... ?It's just a game ...

_________________
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

Tas

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:34 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:01 am
Posts: 7823
Location: Sydney, NSW

Quote (pixelgeek @ 18 2005 July,02:35)

Quote (Legion 4 @ 17 2005 July,07:41)

Yes, Tas's points are very valid, and both he and I have "real world" experience with CAS.

Well "real world" experience is a nice thing but ultimately you're talking about a game and one of the criteria for a game ( as opposed to a simulation) is that it be fun to play.

Quite true, and I always use my experience as a measure of something "feeling right" as opposed to an accurate simulation. ?And if its no fun, then nobody would play.

However, this thread started as a discussion of the escalating power/inbalance of Aircraft and their battlefield effects. ?In lieu of a streamlined aircraft combat system that meshes into the Epic system, I am suggesting that the older and more abstracted system worked better as a combined arms warfare game (and yes I did play it).

L4's comment on GW was both valid and pertinent. ?The rules GW generates MUST relate back to miniature sales by default (they ARE a company! However much we may forget that in our wargamers' zeal ?

) so having offboard support neither helps those sales, nor gives players the satisfaction of putting their nice, well painted lead on the table.

The best result, as usual, is a compromise between the two. And the necessary blood, sweat and obvious tears to get there

_________________
Tas
My General blog: http://tasmancave.blogspot.com/
My VSF Blog: http://pauljamesog.blogspot.com/
My ECW Blog: http://declaresir.blogspot.com/

Top

dafrca

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:19 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA

Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,12:26)

Its a pretty big topic with a lot of related but divergent issues.

Part of my issue requiring clarification is that I don't particularly think that we need to be beholden to 40K fluff (especially when there are so many areas not explored in the background for a game of Epic's scale) but also because I don't think Jervis in particular is that fixated with the fluff. Perhaps its because he has seen it change so often to fit the whims of the current 40K design team?

Are Necrons robots? Aren't they filled with the spirits of the dead?

True, it is a large subject.

Oh and yes, the newest fluff has changed Necrons from Robots to Undead.

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

dafrca

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:25 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA

Quote (Tas @ 17 2005 July,16:34)

L4's comment on GW was both valid and pertinent. ?The rules GW generates MUST relate back to miniature sales by default (they ARE a company! However much we may forget that in our wargamers' zeal ?

) so having offboard support neither helps those sales, nor gives players the satisfaction of putting their nice, well painted lead on the table.

But had they made it an off table thing, then made more ground units, I would have bought them too. :;):

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

Jaldon

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:53 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am
Posts: 720
Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.

I am reminded of what Frank Chadwick said about realism in games. "If it takes three hours to play a game that represents fifteen minutes of actual combat, what is realistic about it?"

I used to own a whole host of J. Dunnigans SPI 'creations', most of them made real good door stops because they were real boring to try to play.

AH quickly went down the same road as SPI with this 'simulation' stuff instead of making games people want to play they worried about making realistic simulations nobody could find the time to learn to play much less actually find the time to set up and play.

GW on the other hand designs 'games' that have elements of realisim in them, and they put playability above realism, and that is a good thing because then the games get played a lot more then some of the 'shelf warmers' I still own (ASL being one of them)

Speaking for myself I play these games because I like a fun mental challange, and painting nice models, and building neat terrain, and meeting like minded people also interested more in fun then 'realism'.

Jaldon

_________________
Brave sir Robin, when danger reared its ugly head he bravely turned his tail and fled, Brave sir Robin.

Top

Legion 4

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:41 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA

Again, reality is in the eyes of the beholder ... as is fun. And I enjoy building and painting G/W Epic and making terrain, etc. I rarely do anything else with any other wargames. So there is some logic in your statement Jaldon. However, many hardcore historical wargamers wouldn't touch any G/W games. I would like to think I'm in the middle; former Grunt, closet historian and Sci-Fi gamer. And like Tas said, it has to feel right. So if we were talking about aircraft in Epic, I would like to make it fun and have the right feel. So I'll modify the rules to suit my concepts of fun and reality, if need be. And do what works for me ! :;):

_________________
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

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Dropship update!

Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:05 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,22:23)

Anything concrete that you are specifically worried about?

Nothing that has become official. Myself and my friends have our own pet hates currently. With me its with aspects of things (45cm 360 defensive flak in the saim haine flyer for example - in a low point game its pretty much untouchable).

I think the current Did you play any of the older versions of th Epic:A aircraft rules? I always thought that the more abstract rules were a bit boring

With you there. Its like the deathstrike. Become a spaceship? I play these games to get the toys on the board. Indeed my yearly residential 1 week campaign WWII game with 60 other guys is all about using as many toys as possible and air - though handled very differently - comes down tot he same philosiphy as Epic A. No toy, no fun.

The fact is, if I played a WWII Skirmish game I would expect the feel of any particular army to be different then when I played a tactical game. Further, I would expect an army to feel even more different if I played a campaign wide game. At GW they work hard, sometimes too hard, to make sure that the Epic army does not have any different feel then the 40k army. Oddly they make a point in the fluff of telling of the multitude of variations that exist and then force all IG to play the same etc.

Well, I'm saving that to my notepad. Its bloody obvious but its something I forget (and I ain't played 40k in over 10 years).

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 17 guests

Dropship update!

Who is online