So your problem isn't anything to do with fleeing towards the enemy but actually March movements - again. As fleeing away from the enemy isnt going to make any difference with a 105cm march.

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

The term disorganized seem to indicate a lack of foreseeing. So how can moving in to a tactical offensive position be done?

The march move is still a problem, yes. But as with (Chromas) objectives just a side effect.

But I realise that there's no will to look at unsensible (core) rules of EA.
And there can't be either actually.
There can only be Errata and FAQ.

I hope I can relocate my rulebook.
But that French compendium look nice, with its integrated FAQ. Good work!

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Write some rules that fix it and we'll check it out.  I think you'll find it virtually impossible to define.

_________________
Neal

Can I put the suggestion forward that given the general happiness with the majority of the core rules since the errata, and in the name of clarity given the current glut of "epic organisations" and rulebook varients that the 2009 rules review should endevour to not make any changes to the core rules?

Adding of new special rules is fine, as these could be all incorporated into a "new special rules" page at the start of the (hopefully) upcoming netERC armylist compilation. Clarifications of existing rules (e.g. lance/ignore cover allocation) is fine too, as this could form part of a new FAQ to go with that document).

I don't think changing the core rules under the netERC banner is going to really help anyone at this stage, and will certainly lead to more confusion and fracturing of the community.

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

Honestly, I don't there even are *any* rules changes on the NetERC's plate... it's all either additions or clarifications.

That doesn't mean people outside the NetERC don't desire such changes, it's just that, currently, we aren't positioning ourselves to make such changes.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

There have been calls in this thread and others for core rules changes, such as Heavy Infantry as a new unit type rather than a special rule, MWAP/MWAT separation, aircraft escorts etc.

This sort of thing I think is best dealt with with new special rules rather than rules changes.

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

Neal just said it was possible.

And an official positioning would be well. So as to know if changes are go, or not.

As for myself I'm mainly looking for adjustments of where marching and broken units may move.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Erik: Again, given the current confusion over what rules are offical or recommended or whatever I think it's best for now if we stick with only adding new special rules to a new document rather than editing the core rules at this stage. It's the only way we're going to achieve the goal you profess to desire - a solid, clear and unambiguous ruleset.

Once this is achieved, rule changes should be looked into at a later stage, but I think that now is really the wrong time to be fiddling around with the one stable thing Epic has going for it at the moment, the core rules.

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

Zombo ~ says who? Was that an official netERC, or was that your own?

Edit - Sorry, that came out hastily.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

I was careful to put a lot of "I think"'s into that post. These are my own thoughts, nothing more. I do not speak for the netERC.

Judging from some of his posts, however, I believe netERC member Chroma is of a similar opinion to me.

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

Erik M: I can't understand where you are coming from with this movement issue.  To my mind, and in my experience, the movement system works very well in Epic as it is, and it offers a lot of strategic options.

If you really want to complain about movement, try playing 40K, there are a lot more problem with movement in that system than there are with Epic I assure you   .

_________________

Well, compared to 40k it might be just fine. Compared to Epic5, SoW and FWC it might not be so perfectly fine...

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

The activations/movement/shooting system is elegant and fine. I'm yet to see any good argument against the current system.

I do possibly agree about not being allowed to march to claim objectives, but I see nothing wrong with the -1 to hit while doubling that you seem to have an issue with. It has a huge impact on shooting; in the case of 5+ to hit weapons (pretty much the standard) it halves the number of hits you're likely to get.

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

I would prefer to move the tH modifiers to their correct places.
Sustained ~ (Aim to) Shoot/+1 (if not required or otherwise hindered)
Advance ~ Move and Shoot/-1
Double ~ Double Move
March ~ Triple Move outside 60cm from enemy and can't capture or contest objective
Marshal ~ Move or Shoot/-1 and regroup
Special Action ~
~ Artillery, there's no "sustained" here, the battery is fully occupied loading etc (yeah, I'm an IG player, so what I get a worse situation, it's correct to not have that "sustained shoot/+1)

And then there's Transport... How was it now... A Thunderhawk can "scope" up units and carry them with it as it "disengage" in the end phase?
How about making boarding and leaving a part move and get away from various strange behaviours?

Ah yes, Broken... How about... Can't move closer to seen enemy within 60cm and unseen within 30cm and not towards enemy lines at all?

nB ~ This is what I'd like to see. But I'll not drive it in any way, 'cause the game works fine as it is. Just as any game does. It can get better and most of all smoother, but not at the expense of fractionating the community.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641