Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Comparability of units between systems.
Falesh
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 4:35 pm
Posts: 313
I've made some more easy printing Army lists and Reference sheets (the Orks and Speed Freek ones are fully updated with the errata). If anyone would find that useful you can download them here:

Biel-Tan Army List v10.83
Biel-Tan Reference Sheet v10.83

Black Templars Army List v2
Black Templars Reference Sheet v2

Feral Ork Army List v5.1
Feral Ork Reference Sheet v5.1

Ghazgkhull's Ork Army List
Ghazgkhull's Ork Reference Sheet

Space Marine Army List
Space Marine Reference Sheet

Speed Freek Army List
Speed Freek Reference Sheet

Ulthwe Army List v1
Ulthwe Reference Sheet v1

White Scars Army List v2
White Scars Reference Sheet v2

EDIT: Added Space Marines, Black Templars and White Scars.

_________________
Easy printing Reference Sheets and Army Lists
Pics of my mini's

John Baldock
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Justiniel
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 5:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 8:59 am
Posts: 3280
Location: Holywood, Northern Ireland
Cheers, now why doesn't everybody do them this way?

_________________
I'm involved in Nunnery Practice :laugh:
My latest Blog http://www.players.tacticalwargames.net ... p?blogId=8
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Falesh
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2004 6:28 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 4:35 pm
Posts: 313
More work while the armies are in playtesting I guess. I only started making them because I found them useful. :)

_________________
Easy printing Reference Sheets and Army Lists
Pics of my mini's

John Baldock
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 9:41 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
In the 'air power' thread, the issue was raised 'should epic units be made comparable with there 40k counterparts'. I would like to expand this issue further to:
'Should there be comparability between 40k epic, BFG, necromunda, inquisitor'.

Let me begin by putting my name forward as one of those people who are all for comparable abilities.

I think 40k and epic and necromunda and BFG and inquisitor should all be comparable - same universe, different ways of exploring it. I want to recognise something when I shift to a different system. I still have dreams of fighting that epic and BFG campaign one day!

There is a lot of poo-pooing of 40k by people who gave it up in disgust a long time ago (as did I).  However, the current 40k is a lot better than its previous incarnations, and changes in recent years, have been more concerned with play balancing issues than huge changes to the fluff. It simply is not true to say there is no consistancy to the 40k fluff and lists - like anything that complicated there is 'variance' but that does not mean we should abandon fundamental constructs.

Rather than aiming for increasing dis-coherency(?) between systems, encouraging coherency between systems (as hard as that may be), is the way to go. As the fluff and background is set mainly by the 40k design team this sets the precedent. The 40k design teams concepts  dominate the marketplace and its hard to argue with success.

In addition Jervis has repeatedly stated that epic A is constrained by the 40k design teams specifications... (which is not really that constrained at all to be honest - eg the latests 40k Tyranid codex mentions all the old epic constructs bar the dactylis ('A dead plucked chicken lying on its back throwing eggs' -JJ)).
One of the problems Jervis stated that epic40k (the previous edition of epic) suffered from, was differences in relative efficacy between epic and 40k units (eg tanks were not tough enough compared to infantry).

Right off the bat the official Epic Armageddon lists and rules have been, and should continue to be, constrained, informed, and enhanced by adherence to the wider picture (in particular 40k and Battle Fleet Gothic). There is after all, plenty of room to take epic gaming  it in any direction people want - outside the official rule and list set. (I myself intend to do just such a thing as soon as Maksim can supply me with some more AT-AT's...  :;): )

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
I say go for it, "Do what works for you" ... and I've got AT-ATs in my inventory too ! :)

_________________
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
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Quote (Markconz @ 17 2005 July,13:41)
'Should there be comparability between 40k epic, BFG, necromunda, inquisitor'.

Define "compatibility"?

Take the Icon Bearer from the CSM list as an example. People think that it should have a specific functionality in Epic game terms to match the 40K background but in that units case the functionality was actually placed on the unit in 40K as a way to justify the unit.  The unit gets some fluff to justify it. So the fluff isn't as important as the actual unit

But the obverse is true. With some few exceptions Chaos has not artillery. its part of the fluff and we're stuck with it. Even if it makes a wierd large scale army. So even if it makes sense in Epic to give a large Chaos army artillery it won't have it unless its an Iron Warriors army or one of a few units like the Plague tower or Contagion which aren't really artillery.

I think that the fluff is a series of guidelines and that there are times when it should be tweaked or even ignored if it makes a better game. Or ignored if it is making design decisions that aren't necessary or that don't make any difference.

The games all have different criteria and requirements that inform the way units get "reasilsed" in that game. An Epic THawk is not the same sort of unit as a BFG THawk. 40K aircraft typically need to be tweaked to make good Epic aircraft.

If you're too rigid in your application of the fluff then you can run into trouble. But by the same token you need to keep that material in mind to make the game consistent with the backlground

Its a bit of a balancing act

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
I believe PG has it right on. Let?s not confuse overall military philosophy with specific details. I know I was talking about those who want the details the same.

The Fluff says Eldar are High Tech and fast. Fine, make them High tech and fast. It says Orks are lower on the tech scale, again fine.

Where I think the effort becomes a problem is just as in PGs example. Just because there is a unit that has X ability in 40k (adds to your attack for example), does not mean that is the exact effect it should have in Epic.

Further, because 40k is dealing with a ?battle? at a much finer detail, then things that should have an effect in 40k may not in Epic.

If I was doing a fine detail Modern game, with SEALS and US Marines on the US side and then I made a MicroScale game, should I keep US forces as troops only? To me it is often the same kinds of arguments I hear.

Now, just to bring it full circle, if the GW universe has Eldar as High Tech and Fast in their overall military philosophy, then of course it should apply to BFG, Epic, 40k, and Inquisitor.

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
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,14:21)
I think that the fluff is a series of guidelines and that there are times when it should be tweaked or even ignored if it makes a better game. Or ignored if it is making design decisions that aren't necessary or that don't make any difference.

The games all have different criteria and requirements that inform the way units get "reasilsed" in that game. An Epic THawk is not the same sort of unit as a BFG THawk. 40K aircraft typically need to be tweaked to make good Epic aircraft.

If you're too rigid in your application of the fluff then you can run into trouble. But by the same token you need to keep that material in mind to make the game consistent with the backlground

Its a bit of a balancing act

This was what I wanted to say. You just put it better.

Bottom line is, have simular systems, like the THawk, but do not try and force the same role in all games, again, like the THawk.

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
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:15 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
By the way, Thanks Markconz for this thread, I should have done it myself.

Better to discuss this without hurting the other thread.

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
 Profile Send private message  
 
MaksimSmelchak
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 4:43 pm
Posts: 7258
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Hi Guys,

Personally, I think that the difference between 54mm Inquisitor, 28mm 40k and 6mm Epic are big enough that units can take on different qualities.

What is a single squad in Inquisitor functions differently than that squad as part of a company task group in 40k which functions differently than a battalion-sized task force in Epic.

Making the company level size of 28mm 40k dictate how single elite squads and entire battallions behave seems pretty foolish to me.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

_________________
6mm Sci-fi:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/6mm ... nWarGames/
My Personal Blog:
http://6mm-minis.blogspot.com/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dwarf Supreme
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Just to add my 2 cents...

I get tired of hearing that something has to be done (or not done) in epic because that's how it is in 40k. I have no problem with units being generally comparable to 40k and most things do need to agree fluff-wise, but they are different games. Not everything that appears in 40k needs to be in epic and I think it is okay for epic to have some things that don't appear in 40k.

I understand why some players want complete consistency between systems, but I think that places unneccessary constraints.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:30 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Adhere to as much universe background and even mechanical consistency as possible, but be willing to dump it for solid playability reasons.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 3:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
All good points, but since I don't/won't play 40K, I'm Epic-centric ! :;):

_________________
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
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Quote (nealhunt @ 19 2005 July,07:30)
Adhere to as much universe background and even mechanical consistency as possible, but be willing to dump it for solid playability reasons.

Yep, that is where I am at.  :cool:

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
 Profile Send private message  
 
zak
 Post subject: Comparability of units between systems.
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:57 am
Posts: 104
Location: Irvine , Ayrshire ,Scotland
Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,22:21)
[quote="Markconz,17 2005 July,13:41"]'Should there be comparability between 40k epic, BFG, necromunda, inquisitor'.

Define "compatibility"?


Take the Icon Bearer from the CSM list as an example. People think that it should have a specific functionality in Epic game terms to match the 40K background but in that units case the functionality was actually placed on the unit in 40K as a way to justify the unit. ?The unit gets some fluff to justify it. So the fluff isn't as important as the actual unit

But the obverse is true. With some few exceptions Chaos has not artillery. its part of the fluff and we're stuck with it. Even if it makes a wierd large scale army. So even if it makes sense in Epic to give a large Chaos army artillery it won't have it unless its an Iron Warriors army or one of a few units like the Plague tower or Contagion which aren't really artillery.


When looking at the BL list , the majority of people thought that as the list needed a character which aided summoning it might as well be called an "icon bearer" because the 40k version does just that.
Why not keep it simple for cross over players.

On the Chaos artillery question , it does mention them in preparetory bombardments in the 40k rulebook. So they must exist in the background even though no miniatures are produced,(AFAIK).

The BL list is one being designed for tournement play only, so it can get by without being an army list which is balanced-out to play campaigns.
So when the list is finished we will have to add the missing trooptypes later. No big deal.

Its a pity really for all the other lists published cover everything necessary to fight combined arms campaigns




_________________
"The Emperor Protects"

.........Commissar Zak
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net