[NetEpic ML] Re: Heresy Playtest Notes

From: Peter Ramos <pramos_at_...>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 02:17:08 +0000


Tzeentch wrote:

> Finally got to play Heresy tonight. It was an interesting battle because
> this was the first game of Heresy I have played and the first epic-style
> game he has played.

Cool, feedback is what we need.

> We played 2000 points each, Marines on both sides.
> Comments and Notes:
> 1) Close combat is insanely deadly, especially if both sides get a Morale
> shift (it gets REALLY ugly).

Very true and it was designed this way. Is ths your preference too?

> 2) Where are the pop-up rules and how far can a pop-up unit "popup"? We
> assumed 30cm. Can a popup unit spot for artillery?

Pop-up will make its appearance in the eldar codex. It will be a skill that only
Eldar gravs will possess due to their superior technology.

> 3) We assumed movement was divided into segments like NetEpic (ie all Strat
> moves then Assault then Advance). But this is not really explicitely stated.

Its like the recommended advance net epic rules where you move any unit
reagrdless of orders as yopu activate to maintain fog of war. Of course this
needs to be cleared up since it does not say this.

> 4) Flyer rules need to be moved since they are REALLY in the way. The flyer
> assault table is the same as the ground combat one so it's sorta redundant.

The difference is the amount of hits generated in assault combat which differs
for both. Of course an integrated table would work.

> 5) When do teleported units appear? Canthey move after teleportation and
> assault into combat?? This happened to meon turn two where he had his
> command landspeeder spot the Termis right into the middle of a Tactical
> squad. Where they proceeded to ANNIHILATE the squad and both Rhinos for the
> loss of two Termi stands. We assumed yes..and it was fun :) Makes Termis
> worth getting again.

They appear when you activate them in movement and yes they can immediately
assault. AOnce again Termies are worht getting, of course they are VERY

> 6) Must open-sheaf templates touch? We assumed yes.

Yes, will clarify.

> 7) Do you scatter each open-sheaf template? We assumed yes.

Yes, they may wind up not touching due to this but thats okay. I will clarify.

> 8) The artillery rules are not explicit. Do you roll based on the SPOTTERS
> movement or the artillery? What if they both moved?

Spotters make a morale based check regardless of their own orders The scatter is
dependant on the artillery's orders and movement. An artillery piece that
doesn't move is a stabler platform that one that does. The spotter can move or
not according to orders and has no bearing on the artillery's scatter.

> 9) Based on above why do spotters on Advance auto scatter 2d10?? That seems
> bogus so we said 1d10 and it seemed more logical.

See above. This whole section needs rewording.

> 10) CAn you snapfire on teleported units?

I would say yes for balance, but I am open to interpretation.

> 11) Ok, artillery suppression. I had a big hand in this so some of the blame
> is mine. But I had a unit of Dreadnoughts suppressed by a wimpy ass 2BP
> scattered Whirlwind template. The double BP for suppression sounds good but
> applied to things like dreads its cheesy as hell. We played it according to
> the rules (they recovered at the end of the turn) but if we play it again we
> will house rule it to that vehicles and walkers must suffer a casualty in
> addition to haveing BP>number of units. Either that or BPs are not doubled
> against units consisting of mainly armored units (MAKs probably being an
> exception).

Dreads are armored units so supression from artillery is at half their BP, so a
2BP template supresses at one (no doubling either) and usually won't suppress.
Again it needs better wording, it mentions it previosly under regular
suppression rules but was not clarified under artillery suppression

> 12) Do supporting units need a line of sight to lend support? We said yes
> they do. Worked fine.

Close combat support needs line of sight

> 13) Do supporting units still lend support even if engaged or if they have
> snap-fired? We assumed no to the first and yes to the second.

If engaged its regular close combat and may not support, snap fire does not
hinder support in close combat. So you are correct on both counts.

> a 5). Seemed logical.

Oops! 5 is fine.

> 15) Do command units in vehicles get their Stealth ability? If not that is
> really dumb since they are more vulnerable in a tank then on foot. For that
> matter what special abilities do attached vehicles get? Do they get the
> commanders when he is in it?

Correct all characteristics of the commander "rub" off to the command vehicle
while they are onboard.

> 16)Do morale bonus shifts cancel each other out? When two high morale forces
> clash the number of dice you roll can reach very high levels very quickly.
> We said yes they do cancel each other out (to keep the dice levels down).
> Alternately what about subtracting the lower morale forces morale from the
> higher and the higher then gets the stated bonus. If the levels are the same
> noone gets a bonus, even if 10+ or whatever. Seems a bit simpler and more
> logical.

Reasonable and easy to change. It will tidy up the process so I'll change it.

> 17) When do firearcs come into play? Are they as restrictive as the Adeptus
> Titanicus ones? We assumed yes but it's very vague.

Yes, like AT weapons have specific fire arcs.

> 18) For Stealth do you roll a single d10+Leadership for each unit that
> attempts to fire on the commander? Or roll a single d10+Leadership that each
> unit in the firing detchment must beat? We assumed you roll for each attempt
> separately.

d10 + leadership bonus (may have missed changing the wording). Roll for each
attempt separately.

> 19) We assume to get out of a transport you must be on some sort of move
> orders. Not explicitely stated.

As net epic any order but prepared fire.

> 20) At the end we had a monster melee consisting of:
> Him
> 4 Assault Marine stands
> 2 Terminator Stands
> 2 Rhinos
> Me
> 1 Command Landspeeder
> 4 Tactical Stands
> 2 Rhinos
> 3 Dreadnoughts
> I was "defender". There were no rules to cover this sort of dogpile so we
> said use the highest morale unit+leadership bonuses. The bonuses canceled
> each other out (see above). We then added everyone into one dogpile roll. I
> was defender so nominated the Dreads as the soak units. In the end I lost
> two dreads and he lost three Assault Stands.

I will clarify, use highest morale for determining shifts in mixed groupings.

> This brought also into question pinning. Is there pinning in the game? If
> not how do you handle moving out of close combat? And what about shooting
> into close combat? Can you blow away the winners in advance? Especially if
> they are the only survivors? It seems simpler (and more brutal) to play
> close combat round after round until once side is wiped out or fails a
> morale check and leaves (or decides to end the combat and must retreat at
> assault move directly away from the winning unit - if they decide to retreat
> and are within X(say 15cm) of an enemy unit at the end of the move they are
> destroyed. Make brutal combats even more brutal and move the game along.
> Plus the massive dogpiles are fun as hell. Especially with ranged combat
> being so damn deadly you almost always lose a detachment on a good volley.
> We were losing 2-3 Land Raiders every volley. Especially since we strictly
> enfored the side/back armor rules and detailed fire arcs.

Pinning does not exsist anymore. Once a round of combat is performed units that
receive casualties and fail morale move away from enemy. There were rules for
voluntary disengagement, but it seems I omitted them (go figure), so I'll put
them in. As for multiple combats that as the original idea, but I'm not sure why
I changed it. Its easy to switch back and add the voluntary rules for

Firing is pretty deadly, which is as it should be. So cover and manuever become
very important.

Shooting into close combat is abstracted by the support rules in an effort to
avoid fiddly rules additions.

> Loved the feel and the system is VERY deadly. Which I liked a lot. We played
> with no Titans or Flyers this time. We'll add that stuff in as time goes on.
> My friend is looking forward to playing Eldar so hopefully that list will be
> done soon or we can kitbash one.

The Eldar list is coming after the squat one which is soon.

> The rules are VERY disorganized and disengenius to wade through but that can
> be easily fixed. We'll be playing NetEpic tomorrow and see how that goes.
> We'll try and get more games of Heresy in before I leave here though. And
> once I'm back home I'll get all my old Epic playing buddies to use Heresy.
> I'll also be working on the Ogre conersions to Heresy :) And especially the
> Battlesuit conversion to it...which reminds me I still have that NetEpic
> conversion if a new Incoming is ever going to be released :) And Hoth and
> Popcans of Doom..etc etc.

<grin> well now you know why we had Birol organize net epic. I can make games
but I'm not very good at orgainization. Also since I know the game I constantly
forget to add rules. Hopefully after this much good feedback it will iron itself

I'm glad the games feel is to your liking, but then again we did create it

> And to the guy who sent me the Battlesuit rules and Ogre book I have not
> forgotten! I'll be scanning the map and making counters soon. And putting
> all the Ogre Book material online (that which has not already appeared).
> Until next game!
> Kenneth Peters


Received on Sun Oct 31 1999 - 02:17:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:58:46 UTC