Tactical Command | View topic

Page 2 of 3

[ 36 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

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

Rant

semajnollissor

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 8:49 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

Also, some weapons (most weapons, in fact) have both AT and AP to-hit values. For instance, a missile launcher is AP5+/AT6+, meaning you can hit infantry on a 5 or better or vehicles on a 6 or better, the caveat being you have to declare what "mode" you are firing in before you roll.

Other thoughts:

"Horse off" ... ? Oh yeah? Try sayin' that to my face. You know, this one:

I'm don't think it was the E:40k rules that killed Epic off, I think it was a pretty conscious decision by GW, so that they could focus on just 2 core games. As we all know, that was a big mistake, but at least they're consistent (they make alot of big mistakes).

Top

primarch

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:50 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

Quote (Enderel @ 23 Mar. 2006 (03:36))

Rant

Ok I'm going to rant. ?I bought a copy of the third edition rules off ebay the other day for 99p. ?Which was a good deal I thought. ?

I read through them last night and it seems that with this edition of the game they made a huge jump backwards.

With most of the games workshop games I've played you roll to hit, you roll to wound, then you see if you can save the wound with a saving throw. ?This works and to me is logical.

Space Marine (Epic) simplified this a little bit by removing the roll to wound, which is fine as it's not on the same scale. Roll to hit (testing your luck with dice) roll to save (testing opponents luck) ?Seems fair. ?Where does this fire power larky come from? ? :angry:

The third edition rules (and I'm expecting E:A to be the same) doesn't really follow any sort of rule. ?It's almost like they wanted to revamp the idea but came up with a really rubbish way of doing it. ?

Why oh why did they go along this route. ?Just so there was significant changes to justify a new release? ?

It seems to take alot of the fun away from it all. No more scatter dice to determine where a titan was hit and the heinous crime of all no more Squats..

No wonder NetEpic is gaining a strong following.

/Rant. ?

Hi!

The original, way back when, was that they thought a new version would boost there sales (GWUS epic sales were around 7-9%). I dont know what their exact percentage goal was, but they wanted more than what they had.

End result... ZERO.

They went from a sold core game to OOP in two years of its release.

Perhaps the worst blunder I have seen GW do.

It hasnt recovered and probably never will. Epic's golden age is long gone.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch

The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Top

primarch

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:53 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

Quote (netepic @ 23 Mar. 2006 (07:17))

Quote (Enderel @ 23 Mar. 2006 (08:36))

Rant

No wonder NetEpic is gaining a strong following.

/Rant. ?

Brief alteration here, NetEPIC HAS a strong following

Hi!

You better beleive it! :;):

Primarch

_________________
Primarch

The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Top

primarch

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:07 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

Quote (Dwarf Supreme @ 23 Mar. 2006 (10:55))

I know a lot of people like the E40k rules, but I hate them, pretty much for the same reasons that you do Enderel. That edition was too watered down from previous editions for my taste and I thought the whole "firepower" system was silly. I admit I was excited when I heard there would be a 3rd edition, but I was sorely disappointed once I read the rules. Yes, there are a few things I like and the minis were gorgeous and it does play faster than SM2, but in my opinion it was the worst edition. The SM2 rules can be a little clunky, but I really like the diversity and the quirkiness of it all.

Even though the E:A rules are written on the skeleton of E40k, it is a better edition. A lot of players say it's the best edition yet. I haven't played it enough to make that judgment, but I do like the E:A rules. Whether I will like them better than NetEpic, however, remains to be seen. ?

Hi!

Hehe. Been a long time since a "editions" thread has been up.

"Better" in a context of a game will always be a real subjective thing. How do you say objecitvely a game is better designed than another? What parameters does one judge? Are those parameters themselves subjective?

It all comes down to taste. What you'd like to see in a game that jives with you sense on how the game plays. That is as varied as people themselves.

The only objective thing one can say about the versions that SM2/TL style and design appeal to far more people than latter versions did. Sales and the years it lasted and was supported are more than ample evidence.

Could E:A had been as popular had the company really supported it?

Thats anyones guess and given current events we'll never know.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch

The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:32 am

Purestrain

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

Quote (Enderel @ 23 Mar. 2006 (18:10))

E:A has AP weapons (cannot hurt armoured vehicles)
E:A has AT weapons (cannot hurt infantry)
E:A has MW weapons (can hurt anything)

I like that idea... ?

although why can AT weapons not hurt infantry? ?Are they missles that cannot lock on to humanoid size objects? Seems strange.

To be more specific - with long ranged fire, AT weapons cannot hurt infantry - meaning that a lascannon cannot effectively acquire and destroy infantry units (5 models to a base), at distances over half a km.

Note that in 'Engage' assault actions which occur at under half a km distance a lascannon equipped tank can use a FF value to attack infantry.

As already noted, many weapons have both a AP and AT value, ie you choose to fire either AP or AT shells each round.

So in other words AT specific weapons do not have enough effect on infantry at long range to justify a potential effect in rule terms. At close range AT weapons can still hurt infantry.

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

Top

primarch

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:42 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

Hi!

I believe that the concepts of AT, AP and MW are one of the VERY good design concepts in epic A. Its a good solid mechanic.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch

The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules

Top

Dingodv

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:55 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:43 am
Posts: 65
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK

i think, tbh, my only niggles with E40k were the rather awkward flight mechanics (i tried to learn that system so many times to no avail), and the fact that the rules were spread across books (i have no idea why but i prefer my rules, bg and armylists in one place).
I preferred the way they dealed with barrages, it made an imperial siege regiment alot sicker.
Aove all E40k introduced blast markers, order dice and possibly a few others which later made bfg the game it is whilst being a base for E:A
And on anything being able to damage warengines, i'd say this is actually accurate. If you were to pour enough fire into anything joints will be hit and other vitals eventually leading to destruction of omportant hardware.

Top

Enderel

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:34 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm
Posts: 1134
Location: Southampton - UK

I think I've got to the main issue of why I dislike the rules so far.

It's to do with the unit choices, it lacks scalability for large scale battles, which I think Epic is all about. In a way it looks like it has limited choices for the large scale while it allows greater flexibility at small scale.

Almost like they want you to play 40k style at Epic scale.

I couldn't imagine picking a 20k side for Epic 40k it would be a chore, picking SP armies at 20k was part of the fun.

Good to see that I've re-ignited the debate on the rule bases!

_________________
I am become death the destroyer of worlds.

Top

Enderel

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:52 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm
Posts: 1134
Location: Southampton - UK

Quote (semajnollissor @ 23 Mar. 2006 (19:49))

As we all know, that was a big mistake, but at least they're consistent (they make alot of big mistakes).

Ain't that the truth

_________________
I am become death the destroyer of worlds.

Top

Enderel

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:57 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm
Posts: 1134
Location: Southampton - UK

Quote (Dingodv @ 24 Mar. 2006 (00:55))

And on anything being able to damage warengines, i'd say this is actually accurate. ?If you were to pour enough fire into anything joints will be hit and other vitals eventually leading to destruction of omportant hardware.

True I suppose that you have to take into consideration that average infantry squad (ala 40k rules) would have two or more support weapons with them (e.g. missile, lascannon, flamer, plasma) so these would have an affect.

The ones I find it hard to swallow are units of gretchin or similar low tech forces with blunderbusses or home made rifles having a fire power level which could hurt something apart from themselves.

_________________
I am become death the destroyer of worlds.

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:39 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

It's to do with the unit choices, it lacks scalability for large scale battles,

I think that is a very accurate assessment.

As far as overall point values, it was just in a different scale. 20K points in SM/TL or EA was really about 12K in E40K.

But either way, large battles became quite cumbersome.

_________________
Neal

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:29 pm

Purestrain

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

I think Epic40k was better for fighting large battles than either SM or EA. Once you'd played it a bit you scould quickly come up with standard formations and just take multiples of them (eg six landraiders and two predators, 2 dozen orks with wagons, 10 aspects with transport, etc etc). Plus it cut out a whole step in the dice rolling process which speeded things up - no armour saves, rather the enemies armour value just modified your initial to hit roll.

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

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:26 pm

Brood Brother

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

Yes, for fighting large battles it was a lot better - you just had to be a man and not min max every formation to perfection, or indeed as I did in the few games I had do each formation to a round number and pick them as appropiate for the battle.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Legion 4

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:45 pm

Brood Brother

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

After owning/playing 4+ iterations of Epic since SM1... and we added activation in SM1 ... I can truly say E:A is the best version yet, IMO ... However, we only like about 85% of the E:A rules and still use some things from SM1/SM2/E40K, etc., to suit our tastes. But as I always say DWWFU (Do What Works For You) ... a key point of L4'sSoTR !

_________________
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

epilgrim

Post subject: Rant

Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:57 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
Posts: 362

For my take on it the introduction of Blast Markers and Army Morale was the crown jewel of E40K.

It reflected the strategic reality that a badly outmanoevered army could lose a battle while sustaining relatively light causalties.

the other bright spot that still has a tremendous value is the Battles Book...so many options...so many ideas...outstanding.

The abstracted shooting seemed to be the real downer for everyone...no chrome as they said.

BFG kept the chart, but the feel of the game lends itself to more abstract mechanics.

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 2 of 3

[ 36 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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

Jump to:

Rant

Who is online