|
I agree Cyber, Epic 40k is relatively easy to set up and play, and it doesn't take long, but it is math heavy and that is the major downside, not the 'simplicity' of the unit stats. Keeping track of army morale is such a pain in the ass sometimes that I have had games that finding out someone had one was a winner was anticlimatic. "Wait- 2 points for my Baneblade down to half strength, 5 points for destroying that bunker, eight blast markers, I'm 15cm away from that objective, oh by the way, you won."
Maybe because it was what I grew up with, and I didn't play the system the most, but there is just something about AT/SM that the others will never be able to replace. It could be the detail I don't know. I think GW did a really good job with the Orks and Chaos at the time, and I am still mad they didn't release an expanded ruleset for the Eldar (Aspect Warriors) since they were selling the minis for some time.
While SM2/TL was perhaps too simple, that is by far the easiest game to set up and play. Army selection is easy, setting objectives is easy, and over all the game was fun. I am way past using order counters, and while I can over look them in AT/SM, for some reason they bother me in SM2/TL. WHAT I LOVE ABOUT SM2/TL are the rules for characters. I wish they had expanded on them.
I remember early on in Epic A, there was a debate if characters should even be in the game and I went nuts on those wanting to keep them out. They add flavor to the game. I loved the Space Wolf characters in SM2/TL for instance, and Gazgul, Yarrick, and I think they even did Squat ones. . . hell, they even made Goff Rockers! That was fun. It may not have felt like a real military game, but it was a fun atmosphere. I don't see 40k fun anymore. With all the darkness in the rulebooks now, everything is just so serious, and as silly as this sounds, I think a good game has both. I am not being critical of the art or anything, I do think it is amazing, I am just saying that like my other favorite games like Man O' War, or Warhammer Quest, there is something good about color, as opposed to everything being dark. Do I make sense?
Anyway, if I met a new friend who was interested in gaming, I probably would steer him towards Epic A because of availibility, but if he had the time and patience (which I have rarely seen) to acquire whatever is needed, I'd let him get whichever one he wanted.
I have played these games in all different situations. I have realized that a game shouldn't be judged by how it plays at a tourney or hobby shop, but how excited everyone gets working on it (reading, building armies, painting) and how much fun comes out of playing it over pizza and beer. Can you play the game with the TV on? Some games you can't. I remember playing SM2/TL with the stereo on, but there was no way we could do that with AT/SM. Anyway, the point is that with each ruleset, each has it's own feel (atmosphere, fluff, artwork, models, and then there are the rules), and I think each captures the imagination of different players.
I absolutely LOVED the Horus Heresy. That sucked me into AT/SM. I think the color and variety sucked me into SM2/TL. Epic 40k was the flexible army lists and the amazing models. What kills me about Epic Armaggedon is Armaggedon. I am so sick of Armaggedon. Boring boring boring. I would have like a new free for all like Battlefleet Gothic.
_________________ Please check out my website: http://www.system17.com
|
