So based on a couple recent discussion on TMP here and here

I was directed here as the place to really get a discussion going.

The basic question is why has nobody built a generic sci-fi game based on one of the iterations of Epic with some sort of unit generator to be able to build custom lists using any minis? I hear great things about Epic when ever 6mm gaming comes up, but for the most part the Epic engine keeps you tied to GW IP.

Thoughts?

Moderators: Sorry if this should be in different board, please move accordingly

Great idea

To what extent does a game company's IP cover game mechanics?

_________________
Uti possidetis, ita possideatis.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
An online epic force creator: Armyforge

Judging by all the rulesets based on Warmaster I'd say that mechanics aren't covered by IP. Specific wording (e.g. certain names like Tyranid or Ultramarine) and artwork is however. Which coincidentally is why all the Epic themed army lists in FWC have generic names.

Mechanics are not covered by IP rules.

However, I think that any "unit generator" system you write will tend to be flawed, and will put out certain units that re overpowered or underpowered. Better to have pre-written army lists.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Would they not be protected under derivative work as it pertains to copyright law?

Would it break the law to re-write an existing rule book and sell it for profit? (all new text, but identical mechanics)

_________________
Uti possidetis, ita possideatis.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
An online epic force creator: Armyforge

Rules mechanics are not protected under IP law.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

As far as I understand it, and based on my involvement with Sturmovic Commander and watching BKC, I agree with E&C. Rules mechanics cannot be protected, but the language used can. So, it is 'ok' to rewrite the rules, change all of the names of the IP-protected units, and keep the 'game' the same. It has come up several times from a couple of people, but never really got off the ground, as it does require a serious investment in work.

_________________
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.

Basically you end up with a game with disruption counters not blast markers etc. As CS says it's a lot of work and if you don't have universe to put lists into I can't see the point for sci-fi.

Other periods, it would probably be worth the effort, but warmaster has got there first

It needs a lot of work to make it fit earlier periods. The core problem is that while the gameplay mechanics are good, the C&C assumes a lot of sci fi satilities, spotters, local nodes etc etc allowing for god like knowledge. The only limit is the readyness of formations to carry out your orders (the action check). As there are enough games with fast paced mechanics for such periods already, normally with the same C7C problems or at least a lot of clunkyness, unless Epic got that aspect right their is no reaon to make a place for it really.

The other problem is the d6 detailed system it provides and the activation advantage issues can't do massively dissparate forces well. More abstract can. So can more details. Epic was stripped to fit multiple company combat in a specific style of play.
So no late war germans against early war russians and the like, which is the sort of thing wargamers love.

Glad to see you stopped by kragon ... For Epic & 6mm Sci-fi this is the place. Also go here and check out DRM's Seeds Of War rules. You can download them for free. I think they are good too. IMO DRM's SoW, FWC and Epic:A are the top 3 systems. Also when we gamed, for example, a Standard Land Raider, whether Imperial, Chaos or looted Ork all had the same stats ... GZG's Dirtside had a good generic unit system, IIRC ...

_________________
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."

If my understanding of the whole timing thing is off, my point falls apart, but:
Dirtside uses alternate activations, for example, and I believe that game predates epic. That's a fairly important mechanic that GW imported into E:A. I would say that reinforces the "mechanics aren't IP" argument. Dave would be more knowledgeable on this however.

As far as unit customization goes, Starmada is an alternating activation game that has a unit generator spreadsheet. In that game, you can make a ship as powerful as you want, but it will limit the number of them you can have. So, there are ways to make customizable lists without breaking the game.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

DSII does use alternating activations, EAs version is modified somewhat to place more emphasis on going first rather than forcing your opponent to go first (hence EA's retaining as opposed to DSII's passing the initiative when you have less activations then your opponent). But yes, mechanics are not IP.

The Starmada spreadsheet works in part due to the game's simultaneous movement and fire, as well as its utter lack of moral. Laying a BM in Epic is fairly important, that's why the cost-per-unit is more in small formations as opposed to large formations. Also, you have the potential to do a lot more with 2 formations of 4 Unit X in EA then with 1 formation of 8 Unit X. The price discounts for Ork mobs are a good indicators of this.

It's because of reasons like this that a unit-cost formula starts to fall apart in the Epic engine. It might be good for a rough guess in addition to things like 2^.5 rule but playtesting is really where you're going to nail down the cost of a unit/formation in a given army (don't forget you'd have to take initiative and strategy rating into consideration as well).

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

We started using activation since SM1 ... IMO ... it should be used in any system. That it could work with ....

_________________
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."

On the first point, there's really not all that much beside player preference to keep us tied to GW IP. In fact, one direction to go is to embark on wholesale proxying on the basis of preexisting army lists. Parenthetically, whether or not the army lists are protectable 'intellectual property, they are certainly intellectual resources of some value-- they've been tested, balanced, and imbued with character that would be absent a generic army generation system. Which suggests a use for the masses of GHQ lead I have sitting in my closet: paint the the T-72's, BMP's, and BRDM's cherry red and call them gunwagons, battlewagons, and war buggies, respectively.

(The sirens start screaming in Youngstown Ohio, as a certain camo-purist is stricken apoplectic by -- nearly -- the ultimate heresy). (Hmm... what does MERDC look like in Lemon yellow, lime green, and radiation purple?)


Just to add to the consensus about the IP in Epic, even if new mechanics could be claimed, Epic's are fairly clearly in the public domain, many of them tracing their heritage to board wargames (vis, the alternating activation system makes one of its early appearances in AH's Storm Over Arnhem, published in the mid 1980s).

By contrast, Warmaster's command/activation system is a bit more unique in its particular form. But that hasn't prevented the mechanism from reappearing in Future War Commander (FWC), Blitzkrieg Commander, and Cold War Commander.

That all said, it is interesting to think about other mechanics that might be imported to a miniatures system: a chit-pull/random sequencing or card/hand sequencing come to mind. (the first may actually descend from the old Sword and Flame miniatures system, while the second shows up in the various Battlelore and Command and Colors board games).

Epic at its core is section one really. Section 2 onwards really only apply to the sci-fi setting and extra/different rules would be need for other periods.

And if your doing that then you could go to the much discussed d10's to introduce more options.