Re: Sv: [NetEpic ML] Net Epic 5.0 ideas

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:13:50 -0400

Hi!

Yes along those lines, no remakes of the actual army cards since everybody has made their armies using the original cards it would be bad to make people re-organize them. Its more on how the cards are used than a change of actual card content.

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mete Senyol" <kume1967_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: Sv: [NetEpic ML] Net Epic 5.0 ideas


> Don't we end up making new company cards or are you
> thinking more like epic40k detechments or like
> Tyranids, Command units, Slaves (core units in this
> case), independents (elites), e.g. an Eldar Warlock
> has a command radius of 25cm, can issue commands up to
> 6 units per turn?
>
> Mete
> --- rune.karlsen6_at_... wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I like this idea. All armies should have a CR of
> > some
> > sort, and all commanders should matter. If you lose
> > a
> > commander, there should be repercussions. This is in
> > effect a structure much like chaos uses per today.
> > I suggest that all the "regulars" be a part of the
> > CR, while "elite or veteran" units are more
> > independent,
> > and are either able to be outside the normal CR, or
> > have their own designated commander. This wouldn't
> > necessarily
> > be a command unit, but just a normal unit which has
> > been designated as their commander (like a
> > lieutenant or
> > something).
> > You also call it a command structure, which leads me
> > to think
> > of HQ cards with bodyguards, comms officers and the
> > like.
> >
> > Just my 2 Nkr.
> >
> > Rune
> >
> > >
> > > Fra: "Peter Ramos" <primarch_at_...>
> > > Dato: 2002/03/26 Tue PM 01:11:01 CET
> > > Til: <netepic_at_...m>
> > > Emne: [NetEpic ML] Net Epic 5.0 ideas
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > The discussions on AA and limiting numbers of them
> > got me thinking about an idea Emiliano
> > (antichrist666it) gave me regarding a new structure
> > for army cards.
> > >
> > > Emiliano has been a very busy little beaver and is
> > basically writting a template for 5.0 all by
> > himself, including a lot of new units and ideas.
> > While we will change and discuss a lot of things it
> > will save us time come time to actually do the
> > revision.
> > >
> > > The following is what he suggested with some
> > changes from myself.
> > >
> > > We still use the same armycard structure but the
> > cards are different:
> > >
> > > Command- this is the "core" you build your army
> > around. So instead of starting with a company card
> > you stand with the command structure.
> > >
> > > Regulars (or line or other suitable name)- these
> > are the meat and drink of any army and will be by
> > far the most common troops available. What number of
> > regular troop companies can be added we can either
> > leave open-ended or set a maximum limit. Units like
> > SM tacticals, IG tacticals, guardians and ork boys
> > fall in this category.
> > >
> > > Veterans (or elite whichever sounds better)- these
> > are specialist, much more uncommon units. I would
> > suggest that they be limited to one or two cards PER
> > command. Units like terminators, aspect warriors and
> > such would fall in this category.
> > >
> > > Specialized units or equipment (for lack of a
> > better name, Emiliano called these "rare" cards)-
> > these are units that are a rarity on the battlefield
> > due to difficulty of construction or lack or
> > availability. You can attach one such company card
> > PER command. Units like AA, deathstrikes, pulsa
> > rokkits and other "wierd" weapons fall in this
> > category as well as titans
> > >
> > > Advantages
> > > 1.You eliminate the problem of over abundance of
> > "specialist" units, since you would need to a very
> > large command base to have a lot of these units.
> > > 2. It uses the same army card format everyone is
> > familar with
> > > 3. Places emphasis on a command structure to build
> > an army
> > >
> > > Disadvantages
> > > 1. It introuduces the need for a command radius
> > for all armies. For some it is not a problem, but we
> > would still need to make rules for them.
> > > 2. What constitutes a command "company" and what
> > units need to be made. Although its a fun endevour,
> > it still means a lot of work to do correctly.
> > > 3. Re-categorization of all units into the new
> > scheme.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> <HR>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0
> Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html;
> charset=iso-8859-1">
> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2713.1100" name=GENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
>
>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hi!</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The discussions on AA and
> limiting numbers of them
> got me thinking about an idea Emiliano
> (antichrist666it) gave me regarding a new
> structure for army cards.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Emiliano has been a very
> busy little beaver and is
> basically writting a template for 5.0 all by himself,
> including a lot of new
> units and ideas. While we will change and discuss a
> lot of things it will save
> us time come time to actually do the
> revision.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The following is what he
> suggested with some
> changes from myself.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We still use the same
> armycard structure but the
> cards are different:</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Command- this is the
> "core" you build your army
> around. So instead of starting with a company card you
> stand with the command
> structure.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regulars (or line or
> other suitable name)- these
> are the meat and drink of any army and will be by far
> the most common troops
> available. What number of regular troop companies can
> be added we can either
> leave open-ended or set a maximum limit. Units like SM
> tacticals, IG tacticals,
> guardians and ork boys fall in this
> category.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�;</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Veterans (or elite
> whichever sounds better)- these
> are specialist, much more uncommon units. I would
> suggest that they be limited
> to one or two cards PER command. Units like
> terminators, aspect warriors and
> such would fall in this category.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Specialized units or
> equipment (for lack of a
> better name, Emiliano called these "rare" cards)-
> these are units that are a
> rarity on the battlefield due to difficulty of
> construction or lack or
> availability. You can attach one such company card PER
> command. Units like AA,
> deathstrikes, pulsa rokkits and other "wierd" weapons
> fall in this category as
> well as titans</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Advantages</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>1.You eliminate the
> problem of over abundance of
> "specialist" units, since you would need to a very
> large command base to have a
> lot of these units.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. It uses the same army
> card format everyone is
> familar with</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Places emphasis on a
> command structure to build
> an army</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial
> size=2>Disadvantages</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>1. It introuduces the
> need for a command radius for
> all armies. For some it is not a problem, but we would
> still need to make rules
> for them.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. What constitutes a
> command "company" and what
> units need to be made. Although its a fun endevour, it
> still means a lot of work
> to do correctly.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Re-categorization of
> all units into the new
> scheme.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Comments?</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>�</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Peter</FONT></DIV>
> <br>
>
>
>
>
> <br>
> <tt>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com</tt>
> <br>
>
> <br>
> <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
> href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms
> of Service</a>.</tt>
> </br>
>
> </BODY></HTML>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards�
> http://movies.yahoo.com/
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Received on Tue Mar 26 2002 - 13:13:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:32 UTC