I've never been a big fan of the GT scenario. It's much too focused on the third turn grab, and it doesn't matter at all if the one guy who just grabbed the objective would be shot to pieces five second later, just so long as he has it for that magical end of third turn.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

RE the GT scenario, there was an article 'Strategy and Objectives for Warmaster' that set out a set of end-game VC for Warmaster games.

One nice mechanic: you'd roll a die at the end of every turn and keep a running tally of the total. The game would end when when the total reached or exceeded 21.

You could do a similar thing for EPIC; roll 2d6 at the end of the turn, start running the victory calculations the total of these rolls reaches 21.

Of course it might also make sense to apply an extra BM each time marching units come under fire (from the time they activate to the time they next activate).

I kinda like the "extra BMs" option Carrington suggests.

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

+1

For the longest time I thought Marching units actually had a penalty when getting shot at, but now I think I'm just mixing it up with E40k or something.

Marching formations already need to be kept track of (as they can't support, fire flak or claim crossfire).

I can see why an extra penalty for marching formations might make sense, but I don't think it would help a huge amount with the issue in the OP. I find that the march for objectives is usually weakened and/or rallied formations racing across at the end of the turn, when they can be sure there's nothing left to harm them.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

You're right that increased vulnerability for marchers wouldn't (really) help things that much (except that they might easier for the opponent's remnant formations to break). That said, I was trying to think beyond my initial idea of making it uncertain when the 'end turn' actually occurred -- I wanted some hard penalty for for a premature march to the objectives. But, as others have pointed out, it also makes sense that marchers would be more vulnerable to direct fire in general.

I like the idea of removing certainty out of the game ending as it is the fact that there is no risk of the marchers being attacked which bothers me and allows them to do some very stupid things.

Keeping it as a valid tactic but adding some risk to it is interesting.

That would create a very different scenario but I like the idea and will try it out.

On the point about penalties for marching in general - Most game systems make you more vaulnerable to enemy fire while marching, restricting it to being used as 'Out of contact movement' or as a risky move. I was surprised there was nothing like that in EA when I started playing. It is certainly worth thinking about. It would add extra realism but I don't think it would help with game balance.

Playing the standard GT scenario, but keeping track of VC's every single turn, with the first player to reach 10* being the winner, might also be fun.

*That should result in something around a 3-5 turn game.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter