Thought i'd get some more eyes on this in this section - I've been playing a bit of EpicA. I like both games but despite surface similarities plays very differently to 3rd ed and can almost be seen as 2 separate systems. Must admit, despite its flaws i still have a fondness for the elegance of Epic40k. Wondered if some vets could fill in some detail on the transition from Epic40k to EpicA ...

As i understand it the Epic40k rules were rushed out half finished due to management changes. The game continued to be developed through the magazines but player pressure to return to the detail of 2nd ed meant slowly the game evolved in to EpicA. I have Firepower 1 which fixes some of the broken elements of the boxed set (anti-tank/super heavy tanks.) but id like to pick up some more of both firepower and epic40k magazine but want to make sure im getting rules that are properly compatible and not just a proto epicA.

I did some more digging last night and as far as i can gather a draft of the Epic A rules came out in Epic40k Magazine 10. I'm particularly interesting in the Tau rules which i think were published in magazines 9+10. Are these still compatible with 3rd ed or had the whole thing changed by this point ?

Thanks in advance.

there's an article somewhere where Jervis discusses how the same players hated the simplcity of e40K but loved battlefleet gothic, and the crucial differences in presentation that created the reactions.

_________________
My shifting projects

I remember that article. Not a shining pretty picture of epic gamers. Not as a crowd eager to try out the latest stuff anyhow. (sorry about the OT comment...)

_________________
Nitpicks Knapsack (Scratchbuilding and 3D designing and printing and painting)

Much like most GW games, Epic has a history of swinging between extremes. First edition was intensly detailed. Second edition looked at the heroes and commanders more than the rank and file. Third edition was overly streamlined. And fourth edition finally settled into a more balanced set of mechanics.

Towards the end of second edition, people were feeling that the game had become too much about the commanders and the 'poster units'. Third edition Epic took some of the core mechanics of BFG - the firepower table being the most obvious - and folded them in to the 6mm game. However, while players loved the thought of a BFG cruiser massing firepower and calculating strengths, at 6mm it felt to a lot of people that this ignored the role of an individual vehicle in a formation - an issue that was far less obvious in BFG. In essence, a formation became about the firepower strength of it, and it really didnt matter what units were including, just how much extra shot they contributed. In addition, the formations were strict in the units included, which is more 'realistic' but left players feeling far less emotionally attached to their miniatures. Picking a Land Raider formation is fine, but picking a formation with Land Raiders, backed up with Land Speeders and Dreadnoughts with an upgrade makes it 'yours'.

There wasnt really an evolution from third edition to EA. I loved third edition, and this entire site and forum are a result of that version of Epic. But, you are right that the third and fourth editions are more properly different games.

There are some similarities between the games, but EA was an attempt by Jervis and the developers to do something different, which is a very different philosophy to the various editions of 40K (ask Andy Chambers! ).

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Interestingly, I was a huge fan of the E:A ruleset, but as the fan-evolved army list now provide us with variant stats for any model in Wh40k, am slowly coming to regret some of the abstraction of E40K.

I still think that E:A is the best ruleset, but I have to admit that the form of the unit data encourages that sort of creep, and we now have so many lists, with so many variants for thing that should (IMO) be irrelevant at this scale, that the elegance of the system is deeply burrowed under the clutter of the army lists...

E40K does not suffer from this.

I really think this is an important point. In E40k it's all about the formation as a single entity, the minis are just part of a big mass that operates as a single unit. When they ported E40k to BFG (not the other way around!), it suddenly clicked - a mechanic feels very different if it's applied to a single ship rather than a company of soldiers, even if a ship and a company can both be said to be the "basic unit of maneuver".



Now that's just not very correct. The detachments in E40k were extremely flexible - armies had separate entries for war engines, flyers and supreme commanders, but other than that most had as little as two different detachments (Eldar, Orks, Tyranids), with only Imperial (combining Marines and Guard) and Chaos (with Marines, Cultists and Daemons) having more. Your basic detachment was pick one command unit, pick up to 10 main force units (in whatever combination you wanted) and 10 support units (limited by main force units). An E40k detachment is basically an entire EA army (minus engines and fliers).

What I really miss from E40k is the scale. EA battles are simply smaller - the abstraction of E40k allows it to handle many more units.

E40K did exactly what it was designed to do and that was allow you to play really big games with your huge collections without it taking an eternity to play. This rule set was all about big battles and the mechanics of the game was designed to make that possible. EA does not allow for such mega battle potential simply because of the extra detail of the units and rules.

We used to play massive games with E40K fielding several hundred troop stands with dozens of tanks and titans per side and actually finish it in a reasonable time, this simply is not possible with EA. There is something really satisfying about getting your entire collection on the table.

Having played both games i must admit EA may be a superior game (especially fot tournament players) but that i still have great fondness for E40K's mega battles. As i get older i find that simplicity of the rules and speed of play have become more important in getting me to the table, and if i can throw my entire EPIC hoard on the table all at once thats even better.

As you have probably guessed i am still a fan of E40K.

_________________
Vanguard Miniatures

Link, http://vanguardminiatures.co.uk/

Stockist of:

Vanguard Miniatures
BattleGroup Helios
Onslaught Miniatures
Pyrkol Gaming Markers
Gregster's Lab
Microworld Games
Troublemaker Games

If you have an army you are familiar with and don't micromanage movement+placement mass EA battles are quite possible, Bill, dptdexys and I used to do 12k a side on bank holidays in 5-6 hours

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Probably true if you are playing EA on a regular bases with as you say familiar forces. We only play occasionally so usually need to re-familiarise ourselves with the core rules when we get a game going. I know we should play more.

I think its telling for me when i say that i just don't play as often with EA as i did with E40K as i don't get the same enjoyment from it. E40k is the only game i've played that allowed me to pull a fully engaged formation from one flank out of the front line, re-organise them, march them the full length of the table over two turns and then use them to shore up my opposite weakly held flank against an unexpected strong enemy attack which stopped my army being rolled up and saved the whole flank from being overrun.

_________________
Vanguard Miniatures

Link, http://vanguardminiatures.co.uk/

Stockist of:

Vanguard Miniatures
BattleGroup Helios
Onslaught Miniatures
Pyrkol Gaming Markers
Gregster's Lab
Microworld Games
Troublemaker Games

Man, i didn't want to stir up the great big epic debate again ! We all know where this ends. ! :-D

Seriously though, i see them as two completely separate games which i can happily use the same minis for - EA is great for a chess like game head to head and very competitive - Epic40k is a night with some beers, a few mates and pushing some toys round on the side. Like MD i probably get more chance a the latter nowadays.

Anyway to the point - anyone offer any advice one magazines? I now have FP 1&2. Which other issues are worth trying to track down? And based on the E40k interest shown here, Would others be interested.in these being made available online?

EDIT : Damn android auto complete! :-)

Did E40k rules ever make their way online?

Legally? Not that I'm aware of.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

I really should try to get this page back online....

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Nice one CS! Could only find old broken links to this with Google.

Great! Now I just need all the magazines!