Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 9 posts ] 

A few design concepts for Epic
nealhunt
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 3:44 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
In response to Tonka's request:

(Dobbsy @ Sep. 01 2006,02:25)
QUOTE
That's just it Lion, we aren't. We are building an Epic army and it doesn't necessarily have to perform in exactly the same way as 40K - just take a few nods from the 40K direction. Too many people make that assumption and it really hampers development IMO. I'm not saying it's not a good guide for things in Epic, just that we need to stop comparing it directly.

Hmm. This is a misconception I unfortunately share as well. For newcomers (like me) to the E:A Tau world, it might be nice to have some "development notes" available to allow us to learn a bit about the history of the development process and what methods and motivations are important to those making these decisions.


The first and most important concept is that the design in Epic should reflect the style and feel of the respective army according to the background.

As many people have noted over the years, 40K rules frequently do not represent the way the army as a whole is supposed to operate.  Eldar, for example, can and were made far more fluid and difficult to engage in Epic than can be done with a small-scale, infantry(core unit)-heavy 40K army composition.


The second element is that Epic should reflect the effects of 40K abilities and stats as they would affect a much larger battlefield.  This is done by 2 methods - abstracting some things into net effects across the battlefield and changing the relative abilities of units when scale requires.

Abstraction:

There are many things from 40K that are abstrated in Epic.  Specific unit upgrades are the first to go in most cases because tracking them is simply not possible.

You don't track whether squad X has melta-bombs.  That would get insanely complicated when you are dealing with 30+ squads of troops.  Instead, you assume that there are a few units with the eqivalent of 40K upgrades scattered around and design generic statlines which reflect a variety of gear that the unit has available.  Another example are the heavy weapons for infantry stands.  Although the stat lines state SM/Missile Launcher and IG/Autocannon, that is done solely for flavor/feel.  Those stat lines should be assumed to include the occasional Lascannon or Heavy Bolter or other heavy weapon.

This is why vehicle variants are relatively few in number.  In 40K you can field Predators with about 30 different variant loads but for the purposes of Epic, that's broken down into simply an AP-heavy version or an AT-heavy version.

For unit abilities, the rough guidelines for determining abilities are: what the units are according to the background material, what are commonly fielded options in 40K, and overall package of options available (as there will usually be some of every type even if rare per the other factors).  That's also the general order of importance for those considerations.  Going back to the Predator example, technically in 40K you can have a Predator without sponsons but 1) the background is that they are fire support tanks and 2) virtually no one fields them that way in 40K, so the Epic stats assume that the few without sponsons are so rare as to be ignored.

Many other things are abstracted besides unit abilities.  Since you are a Tau player, an example you should be familiar with are things like Shield Drones and the Crisis' ability to hop in and out of cover at micro scale begin integrated into the overall armor save.

Terrain is abstracted.  Rarely is terrain absolutely flat.  Even if there are not sufficient features for the terrain to count at Epic scale, it's assumed that there are the occasional copse of trees or low hill or bit of brush.

Movement is abstracted.   Epic scale movement is assumed to be tactical - leapfrogging units, jumping from cover to cover, etc..  Even when "in the open" the units are taking advantage of the minor and unrepresented terrain features as above.

An Assault in Epic is assumed to be roughly similar to a 40K game.  All kinds of things are abstracted in that.  All weaponry is included in the CC/FF values.  There is assumed to be quite a bit of movement that is so small as to not be represented on an Epic board (typically referred to as the "swirling melee").  CC values can include point blank fire (Assault weapons in 40k) as the units are entering hand to hand, and so on.  That's why things can happen like CC attacks being applied to units that aren't in base contact.

Scaling:

As far as effects which should be different at higher scales, there are as many considerations as there are for what should be abstracted.

Weapons at long range don't target individual units.  In real life military speak this is the difference between a point target and an area target.  The effects of heavy weapons should be scaled up based not on "this guy shoots at that guy" but on the idea of saturating the area the enemy is in with fire.  40K ballistic skill is taken into account but it is definitely less important.

While in general the idea is to stick with roughly the same proportional strengths of units as is present in 40K, somethings just aren't.  Artillery is the prime example.  An artillery piece in 40K where the engagement distance is 250 meters or less absolutely has to be more powerful in Epic where the scale runs distances into the kilometers.


Needless to say, there is always substantial debate over how various scaling and abstractions should be represented.

There is also always a lot of confusion about what sort of cool special abilities from 40K should or should not be present.  To stick with the Tau examples, there have been several times in the past few years that a 40K Tau player has switched over to Epic and been extremely disappointed that Tau units don't get the "hop around" ability as in 40K and want something akin to the Eldar Hit and Run rules.  The difference, of course, is that short hops by individual units are abstracted (if represented at all) in Epic while the Eldar H&R represents dramatic, sweeping movement by large groups of troops - utterly different than the 40K Tau ability.  Instead, the ability is abstracted into the armor save as noted above.


Overall, the 40K rules are supposed to be an informative guide but still a minor consideration.  As long as the Epic rules are not grossly at odds with them the prime consideration of feel and flavor of game play should be the determining factor.

===

That's obviously a very "quick and dirty" version.  There are more specific considerations relating to certain aspects of the design.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
colonel_sponsz
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 4:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:14 pm
Posts: 390
Great post, Neal!

Orde

_________________
"I'm smelling a whole lot of 'if' coming off this plan."

Tau Army List Archive
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dwarf Supreme
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 5:17 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Thanks for the incite, Neal. I was aware of most of this already, but it's still good to have the opportunity to look "behind the scenes".

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 5:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
Good stuff, Neal ! :D

_________________
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  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 7:12 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Good work Neal!

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CyberShadow
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:15 pm 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore
I pretty much agree with Neals post. One thing that I would like to add is where the various games fit together. My philosophy is that the background and design concepts rule force creation.

The impact of this is that 40K is a representation of a force in a specific aspect, sometimes an imperfect representation as defined by the core rules mechanics of the 28mm skirmish game.

There are times when Epic and 40K clash in terms of rules design, as a result of both the scope of the operations protrayed, and the core rules mechanics used to express the features.

In these cases, I believe that it is important to look to the background. This is not so controversial, except that it may mean that 40K concepts are over-ruled by logical thought. Where you have two different sets of rules mechanics, they will both have different strengths, and sticking strictly to the more megolithic can lose the strengths of the 'under dog'.

_________________
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.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:29 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Silly question, but what happens when there's no clear background fluff either way on a situation?

Do we resolve the question in the direction that use in games of 40k leads, or do we do what works well in Epic, paying no attention to 40k gameplay?




_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:03 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Why, then we end up with the Hydraphant. :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CyberShadow
 Post subject: A few design concepts for Epic
PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:39 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

(Lion in the Stars @ Sep. 03 2006,06:29)
QUOTE
Silly question, but what happens when there's no clear background fluff either way on a situation?

Do we resolve the question in the direction that use in games of 40k leads, or do we do what works well in Epic, paying no attention to 40k gameplay?

Personally, I find that this is a lot rarer than imagined. The 40K lists and rules do point towards a methodology of conducting war. However, we should not be scared of 'creating' background where it is required. A good example of this are the various SHTs for the Tau and Necrons. Both of these forces did not exist before EA, and in 40K there are a  very limited number of larger war engines. Does this mean that Tau and Necrons dont get SHTs until they work their way into a 40K codex?

No. The sensible thing to do is to use the 40K background to logically create some heavy hitters. Will we see things like the Scorpionfish in 40K versions? Possibly.

_________________
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.
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 1
  [ 9 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 89 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