Re: [NetEpic ML] Epic 40,000 evolution

From: george_sharp1 <geo-an-sue_at_...>
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 23:36:53 -0000

Well for what it's worth, here's my opinion.
I actually like the Epic 40k ruleset.
I liked the sound of SM/TL, got hold of the rules book, started
reading, got about 1/4 way through the first, then tossed it aside,
far to complex. And i'd played 40K, Necromunda, etc quite a bit
before. It is only now that I feel I can cope with SM/TL or Netepics
complexity. The new rules ad a little 'grit' which is indeed nice,
but I don't want it to get too complex, as it means we can still get
a game of it in at our club, we never would with SM or Netepic, and
yes we have tried :-)
For me AT2 has had the exact opposite effect to what others described
earlier. Her it's got pic being palyed agin. I could never get an
opponent beofre, but since AT2 was released i've played about 5 games
of that, about 4 epic games and 2 games using both sets of rules.
 
But it is all a matter of opinion, and I do believe GW is a little
full of itself, although Fanatic seem better. I haven't actually got
the issue this threads about yet, but it ought to be a good read :-)
Received on Sun Feb 03 2002 - 23:36:53 UTC