Your contributions |
|
Gandalf the Grey
|
Post subject: Your contributions  Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 8:55 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:23 pm
Posts: 789
Location: Tampa, Florida
|
Hi guys, I was thumbing through EpicA today and could see how some of the things I really fought for got into the game, like giving the Steel Legion two support formations per company. I know my name isn't going to be anywhere, but I like that I had an influence. Another thing I pushed for was early on on how armies were selected (formation x with an upgrade) so that choosing a force was quick and easy, but still retained some flexibility so everyone could play with customized formations. That was in the first email I ever sent to Jervis, and I fell out of my chair when he emailed me back. I sent him a three page letter on all the pros and cons of all the Epic systems and thought it would be too much, but he was thankful for all the detail. I was shocked the Godfather of Epic was so accessable!  LOL
Of course, I would have liked to see formations split their fire somehow, even if it came at a penalty, but I guess you can't win them all. That is really the only thing making feel like Epic A is a complete game. Overtime I know the rule will annoy me like I expect it to.
Anyway, boy there were a lot of arguments and I have to admit the process was pretty cool. The final rules are very good and it will be interesting to see how it all works out. I am sure Epic will be Fanatic's big money maker.
Anyway, I was curious if you guys had any rules you fought to keep that stayed in or ones you regret that were left out. . .
_________________ Please check out my website: http://www.system17.com
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
MaksimSmelchak
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 11:16 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 4:43 pm
Posts: 7258
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
|
|
Gandalf,
Yes, I fought for a lot of things and it appears many of them have reached the rules.
Unofrtunately, one of the things I fought for was to make the Orks better than they were in Epic-40k, and it appears I largely failed in the regard. However, I'm reserving judgment until I receive my set of rules.
I also campaigned for a better set of structure rules and I don't know if that happened.
One of my biggest surprises was that I have been apparently mentioned in the rulebook by Jervis as a major contributor.
Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Warmaster Nice
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 11:20 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:15 pm
Posts: 7948
Location: Denmark
|
|
Not exactly a rule but I kept yapping on about Speedstas and it would seem that they will make a comeback in the Speed Freeks list published in WD march. I'm not sure if it is my fault though...
Cheers!
_________________
Sofa General
Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tas
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 11:33 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:01 am
Posts: 7823
Location: Sydney, NSW
|
| Quote (Gandalf the Grey @ 27 2004 Jan.,04:55) | | Overtime I know the rule will annoy me like I expect it to. |
Then change it! make up your own house rule that you and your gaming mates like! Rules are basis for change only...
I think I may have had a few small wins here and there, but the whole experiecne left me jaded and the recent events have left a rather unpleasant taste in my mouth and I wish I hadnt bothered sometimes.
A great concept, but the execution left something to be desired. The best part of being a part of the playtest forums was that it led me here! 
I'm glad you guys feel like you have had a win! Really I do.
Somehow, I now feel less enthusiastic about Epic and am giving it a break to build catapults, play ancients etc . Hopefully I will then be in a position to get all keen again when I actually see the EA product available to me.
Sorry to get all surly- I am just really dissappointed by the whole thing; back to my Happy Place now 
_________________
Tas
My General blog: http://tasmancave.blogspot.com/
My VSF Blog: http://pauljamesog.blogspot.com/
My ECW Blog: http://declaresir.blogspot.com/
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
TuffSkull
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 11:43 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 11:49 am
Posts: 2830
Location: South East UK
|
Whilst I was never one of the "Titans", I did get the oppertunity to add my thoughts to the pot at the very beggining & am pleased to see we ended up with unit activation rather than army activation which was my one main request for the new edition. Thats certainly the thing I'mmost pleased with, not that it was by any means my doing, but it was one thing I really wanted but never thought I would see in a GW game!
Obviously, I'm also rather proud to have my name down as a paint slapper
_________________ Cheers, Paul "TuffSkull" T. http://hobbybrush.com - My New Website, with thousands of painted Mini Pics :) http://hobbybrush.blogspot.com - My Hobby Blog TuffSkull's notepad- My Old Blog on Wargames Wiki.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
dafrca
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:03 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
|
| Quote (MaksimSmelchak @ 26 2004 Jan.,14:16) | | One of my biggest surprises was that I have been apparently mentioned in the rulebook by Jervis as a major contributor. |
Yep, you are listed right there in the "Play Testers" section. Jervis did remember those who tried to help the most.
dafrca
_________________
"Every Man is a But Spark in the Darkness"
- Cities of Death, page 59
Come fight me, if you dare...... http://dd-janks.mybrute.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Markconz
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:48 am |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
|
|
I didn't have time to contribute much, but I was also happily surprised by personal e-mails from Jervis. I was also pleased to see my suggestions about the Tyranid and Guard lists taken up.
BTW Maksim I personally I think the orks are much better in EpicA than in Epic40k... I am currently working on two more big warbands... and on completing 4 huge blitz brigades, each with 3 Supa Zzap guns... they really murder enemy armour. EpicA has really got me inspired to play and build orks again!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Legion 4
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:45 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36984
Location: Ohio - USA
|
Do what works for you ... 
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
CrimsonFury
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 3:43 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:04 pm
Posts: 766
|
Things I pushed for that it into the rule book:
The current crossfire rules. I didn't like any of the previous versions requring things like 90 flanking angles, both units being in range, specific unit facings etc. Along with a few other people I pushed for a simpler rule, and one that also makes crossifre manouveres harder to pull off.
Landing craft cost: I think the LC could do with a total stat re-work (it was changed drastically at the last minute with no time to play test). When the current version was added, it had was 250 points. Myself, neal and a few others pushed to increase it to 350 points, which it is now.
Aircraft stats: I suggested a totally different set of stats for the thunderbolt, which are the ones that are printed in the rule book
I also pushed for limiting the AA abilitys of bombers with all round fire arcs, as a result all the bomber AA weapons with all round fire arcs were reduced to 15cm range, giving most interceptors the option to attack from a safe distance (30cm) at the cost of less attacks.
Fearless units: I really disliked the "immune to panic" rules. They allowed units ITP units to shoot while broken, and of ten it was to your advantage to deliberately get a formation broken so that you could move twice per turn (2 fallback moves) and shoot af full effect instead of moving once and suffering from BM suppression. I made a post pushing for a change and Jervis came up with the current fearless rules shortly after, which are very similar to what I suggested.
Landspeeder typhoons: Got the missle launchers changed to twin-linked, which should make them just about worth having now
Demolisher cannons: Got their AP stats improved to 3+ (I wanted them to be MW5+, but too many people objected  )
Land Raiders: Got them allowed as transports for devastators
Things I pushed for that didn't get in the rule book:
Alternate rules for ranged macro weapons: I wanted macro weapon to be a note on the end of ranged weapons, and still give them seperate AP\AT stats, to allow for a wider variety of weapon stats. eg Dark Reaper missle launchers could have been AP5+, macro weapon, demolisher cannos could have been AP4+\AT5+ macro weapon etc.
War engines: As with macro weapons, I wanted it be a note that was listed in addition the main stats (eg you ocould have an INF\LV\AV, war engine) to allow things like a hive tyrant or greater daemon war engine that was still an infantry unit.
Different flak rules\stats: IMO the rules for resolving flak\interceptor attacks are awkward, and taking out air transports before they drop off their passengers is nearly impossible due to their stats. (IMO they should lose either the reinforced armour or the warengine status).
Several other changes which I can't remember, some that made it in and some that didn't.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Gandalf the Grey
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 4:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:23 pm
Posts: 789
Location: Tampa, Florida
|
|
Hey Crimson,
I like that devastators can have land raiders too, hell, I think the tacticals should have them as well.
The thing that annoys me about the Space Marines Rhinos is that they are included in the costs of the formation. I battled against this, usually against non-Space Marine players because EVERYTHING SHOULD HAVE A COST. Why add Dreadnoghts to a Space Marine formation if it is going to slow them down to a crawl? What is the point of tailing Rhinos if the devastators can all ride in the Land Raiders? I like the flexibility that is there now, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with having tactical units and such on foot, and paying for a Rhino upgrade. You are just wasting the points. If you knocked off 50 points or so, I could invest in a commander or something. A commander, tactical formation, and two dreadnoughts makes more sense than a tactical formation with rhinos, and two dreadnoghts.
Of course I had to hear lame arguements that the rhinos were included in the costs, use them or lose them, which hardly seems justifiable.
_________________ Please check out my website: http://www.system17.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Legion 4
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36984
Location: Ohio - USA
|
I like what I see in the rules and will buy a copy when they get to the US. But I didn't care to get involved in their creation. We play our own "Hybrid" version and will probably add some of the E:A rules to the mix. I think everyone gets too "wrapped around the axle" about "offical rules". Buy the E:A rules and play Epic as you and your crew sees fit ...
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
CrimsonFury
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:15 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:04 pm
Posts: 766
|
| Quote (Gandalf the Grey @ 27 2004 Jan.,15:32) | Hey Crimson,
I like that devastators can have land raiders too, hell, I think the tacticals should have them as well.
The thing that annoys me about the Space Marines Rhinos is that they are included in the costs of the formation. |
I agree, I asked several times for land raiders to be available to all SM infantry and to drop the points cost of land raiders a bit (as did a few other people), Jervis decided he would allow them for devastators and we couldn't change his mind on the other stuff :\.
I suspect LR points cost will be one of the things that changes in the annual once there have been a couple of Epic GTs where hardly any land raiders are used
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Warmaster Nice
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 9:30 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:15 pm
Posts: 7948
Location: Denmark
|
They should be avalilable too all SM infantry -and actually more common than Rhinos if anyone is doing a pre heresy army (I know I will as I have some 30+ land raiders at the moment )
Cheers!
_________________
Sofa General
Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Taladryel
|
Post subject: Your contributions Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:28 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 4:11 am
Posts: 11
|
|
Well, I finally have the time to get back to Epic (after about a 2-year absence), and was thinking of starting out by playtesting Black Legion and/or Thousand Sons (easiest things for me to proxy as I already have a Marine force - plus there seem to be enough 'Nid/Tau enthusiasts as is).
With that, since I have been gone for a while, I do have a few questions.
1. How current are the BL/TS lists in the Vault?
2. Are these armies anywhere on the development schedule or are they just something "to be done in 3 years or so after we're finished releasing 15 other lists"?
3. Is there a particular reason why there is no dedicated Epicomms forum for Chaos/BL (or am I just missing something)?
3.5 Who, if anyone, outside of Fanatic is co-ordinating these particular lists?
4. Where is it best to post findings/suggestions/etc.? [Fanatic's new forums, Epicomms general forum, send them to someone via email, etc.]
Tks in advance.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
