Re: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] Core rules: summary

From: peter cornwell <petecorn_at_...>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 00:50:04 +1000

Hi!

I know the discussion has moved on but I've been busy.

About alternate objectives - I agree that the twelve proposed in the WD
article are way
too many (I don't know what they were thinking). For small games at least I
agree that 4
is a better number. With eight the game can become too much of a dash for
objectives.
You end up getting too many VP's early in the game and the games end just
when they're
getting good. I remember one E40k guy saying he hated Netepic because he
never played a game that lasted more than 2 turns - maybe this is why.
For big games I like having more objectives though, it encourages the battle
to spread a bit
and not just become a mindless slug-fest as all the units huddle around a
couple of spots.
How about having some sort of simple table that alters the number of
objectives according
to the number of VP's needed to win? This would keep the ratio of objective
VP's constant.
Infact, doesn't 3rd ed do this?

Also if your going to include these at all I think removing the Bombard
objective would be a good idea.
I think it favours players with building destroying weapons, and then they
get easy victory points
just for sitting on their arses and blasting the objective. just my opinion
though.

Also I regret to say I didn't spend much time trying to re-word the
objective descriptions from
WD, so could that raise copyright issues? I can re -write them.

Also - which ever way the poll works out, maybe the option that doesn't get
picked could become
another type of alternate objective counter.

I agree that scenarios are probably better than randomly picked objective
counters, but they can still be
a starting point to create your own scenarios.

Peter Cornwell



Peter Ramos wrote:

> Hi!
>
> This is a recap of what we have so far (note that those areas that were
> generally agreed upon will not be restated):
>
> Free Cards
> Although a player may be entitled to a free card he is not obligated to
> field it. Free cards do NOT occupy a special card slot
>
> Point increment 25 points
> The majority favors it, it remains unchanged.
>
> Redundant units
> A poll will be submitted with the following alternatives:
>
> 1. Redundant units will not be allowed
> 2. Current ruling- a duplicate unit may be purchased for every 3000
> points
> 3. Proposed change- a duplicated unit may be purchased IF all other
> units of that type have been purchased (referring to other redundant
> units) and an additional 3000 points of support (non-redundant units)
> are also purchased
>
> Objectives
>
> There are opinions on both sides of this issue so a poll will be
> submitted. The options are:
>
> 1. Keep existing rule- close unit to the objective marker within 15cm
> claims the objective. Units in close combat and units on fallback orders
> cannot claim objectives. Two opposing units that are equally distant of
> the objective counter leave the objective contested.
>
> 2. Proposed change- an objective can only be claim if all enemy units
> within 15cm are eliminated. Units on fallback orders or in close combat
> do not claim objectives as above.
>
> ON a side note, objectives are claimed BEFORE rallying occurs but after
> repair/regeneration.
>
> Advanced objectives
> These are from old WD's and little opposition was voiced against
> including them. I also included scenarios that appeared in an even older
> WD for inclusion
>
> These are the advanced objectives posted by Peter Cornwell
>
> They came with two different color backings to distinguish your
> objectives from your opponents. You place them as in the main rules,
> except each side apparently had 6 each (I never played it this way).
>
> If one of your models gets within 15 cm of the opponents counter you can
> flip it over to see what his mission is.
>
> The objectives are each worth 5 points and they are:
>
> TAKE AND HOLD
> The standard mission objective.
>
> ASSAULT
> This objective marker represents an enemy held position, such as a
> communications relay point. To achieve the mission you must attack the
> counter in close combat just as if it was an opposing model. The counter
> has a close assault factor of +5, and the combat is treated just
>
> like any other close combat ie the attacking model must be on charge
> orders, either side gains the benefits of secondary attackers and the
> objective is affected by any special weapons or rules. If you win the
> close combat the position has been successfully stormed and if you lose
> the combat you're dead!
>
> This is a one shot objective who ever gets it first keeps it and its
> removed from play.
>
> CAPTURE
> The capture mission is completed as soon as you can move troops within
> 15cm of the objective and closer than the enemy in the end phase of the
> turn. Unlike Take and Hold, the objective becomes yours for the rest of
> the game so you can take the counter once you have achieved your
> mission.
>
> RESCUE
> Rescue is different from the other objectives (except Take and Hold), in
> that either player can claim victory points for achieving the mission.
> If a model moves onto (not within 15cm) the objective, place the counter
> under the model (or on the base of the Titan). The model can then move
> normally, taking the counter with it. If the model carrying the counter
> is killed by a ranged attack, leave the counter in place until another
> model moves onto it and picks it up. If the escorting model is killed in
> close combat, the victor may take the counter and escort it from then
> on. If the escorting model is part of a detachment that has fallback
> orders then it automatically drops the objective counter. Whoever is in
> possession of it in the end phase gets the 5 victory points.
>
> CLEANSE
> You achieve the Cleanse mission by preventing your opponent from
> capturing the objective. The enemy may capture the Cleanse counter just
> like a Take and Hold objective (but gains himself no victory points). If
> your opponent is not within 15cm of the objective counter (and closer
> than your troops) in the End phase, you score the five points.
>
> BOMBARD
> To achieve this objective, you must destroy the counter. It is treated
> like a building with a 4+ save on 2d6, and can only be targeted by
> barrage weapons or weapons whose specific description states that they
> may attack buildings. If the counter fails it's saving throw it is
> destroyed and the player may take the objective.
>
> Originally there were two of each objective counters per player, and six
> were drawn out at random (per player). They described a "Poker" type
> quality, as you slowly discover what your opponent's objectives are. For
> me this seems too random. I also agree that you should know the
> objectives before choosing your army, even if the locations may end up
> being randomised. I've only ever sprinkled a few alternate objectives
> amongst the Take and Holds. If used in a mutually agreed fashion, they
> can definitely make things more interesting, and help give each battle
> its own character. There are tons of ways they could be applied or rules
> tweaked. eg not having them secret at all etc.
>
> Despite the different game mechanics, apparently 3rd edition has these
> alternate objectives. In the meantime they did some more playtesting and
> it looks like they made some improvements (like rightfully eliminating
> the Bombard objective - yes it is a crap objective). I'm no authority on
> the matter as I don't intend getting third edition.
>
> I'm not saying these rules should necessarily be incorporated into
> Netepic at all - but they were as much a part of 2nd edition rules
> additions as Ordinatus and Fliers.
>
> I'd say eliminate the artillery objective and make these objectives know
> to both players so they may purchase armies accordingly. They may be
> used in conuction with take and hold objectives or stand alone.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Also I'd like to add a variant rule to objective that Darius uses where
> the amount of objectives for a given game are halved (use 3-4
> objectives). This increases the carnage of battle since you need to
> break more units to win.
>
> Scenarios
> These are from WD 172. They were made by Mark Watts which was, IMO, the
> ONLY guy who understood epic well enough, wasn't cheesy and made decent
> rules (he's the one who made the original Q&A's).
>
> 1. Rescue operation- There is a spy that needs to be rescued/captured.
> He is defended by a small contingent, but is behind enemy lines. One
> player becomes the defender and may place up to 25% of his forces
> defending the spy. No vehicles can be included in the defending
> garrison. The game is played by the long length of the table (6-8feet).
> The spy and the defense force are played way in the back in an area of
> 25cm square. One building should be in this area and that's where the
> spy is. Place all other defenders. The remaining units are placed on the
> diametrically opposed table edge. Once placed the attacker places all
> his forces 11/2 feet from the table edge where the defender set up his
> remaining forces (of it's a 8 foot long table 2 feet). NO fliers are
> allowed on either side! The spy is treated as a command unit with CAF of
> zero and no ranged weapons. Since both sides need him intact he cannot
> be voluntarily killed. If by happenstance he is "killed" treat as
> wounded and it cannot move any more, but can be transferred by vehicle.
> Victory is achieved by the defending player IF he can exit the spy out
> through the table edge he entered (meaning moving the spy clear across
> the table!) by turn 6. The attacker wins if he has control or disputed
> control of the spy. It is a draw if the defender has the spy but has not
> escaped by turn 6.
>
> 2. A bridge too far- The game is played along the long axis of the table
> as in the previous scenario. Two rivers with one or more bridges are
> placed at the end of the table. One river is placed 1 foot from the edge
> the other 2 feet from the edge. Bridges should be placed to give so as
> to be equally close to both sides. The rivers are parallel to each
> other. For purposes of the scenario the bridges cannot be destroyed. If
> by happenstance, it is destroyed, treat as damaged and terrain difficult
> for infantry and impassable by all else. Armies deploy normally. Four
> objectives will be placed close to bridges, the others can be placed
> else where. The terrain around bridges should have many buildings.
> Normal victory conditions apply. This scenario can be turned into a
> siege scenario by having the defender behind the rivers preventing
> crossing.
>
> 3. Flank attack- Deployment is as in a standard game, except one side
> can ONLY deploy in the middle 3 feet (on a 6 foot table) or 4 feet (on a
> 8 foot table). The extreme flanks of each side will be full of woods,
> hills of mountains. Objectives are placed normally. The opposing army
> may take up to 25% of his forces as a "flanking force" and MUST write
> down on what turn the flanking force will arrive and which side or the
> two "flanks" where the first player could not deploy. This must be done
> before he sees the deployment of that player (best done by letting the
> "flanker" deploy first). Normal victory conditions apply.
>
> 4. Capture and hold- Only two objectives are used and are placed in the
> center of the table 3-4 feet apart. These are very important objectives
> and can be anything. Standard deployment applies. The objectives cannot
> be destroyed by either side or rendered impassible (as by say a pulsa
> rokkit). The winner is he who controls both objectives all else is a
> tie. The game lasts D3+3 turns. No VP's for casualties are awarded!!
> ONLY the objectives count.
>
> 5. Break out- No objectives are used. One player is the attacker the
> other the defender. The defender may arrange terrain to his liking. The
> defender selects which side of the board he begins on. The defender will
> have HALF the points in total the attacker has (if it is a 6000 point
> game the defender gets 3000 points). The defender will set up anywhere
> on his half of the table. Game begins by attacker moving onto the board
> (in fact he does not deploy, his first turn IS deployment). The attacker
> must exit HALF of his army off the defenders side of the table. Broken
> units do not count! To make it easier calculate your total VP's in your
> army and you win if you get half of the off unbroken. Damaged
> titans/praetorians count as half VP"s. Defender wins if less than half
> make it. NO fliers allowed!
>
> Movement
> You may not activate a unit on first fire orders for purposes of
> movement when you have other units with charge or advanced orders that
> can move. This is to avoid the ploy of using such units in order to move
> more units capable of moving last.
>
> Embarkation/disembarkation of units- A poll will be submitted with the
> following choices:
>
> 1. Keep current rule- it costs the unit to be embarked or the transport
> a proportional amount of its movement to embark or disembark from a
> transport.
>
> 2. Proposed change- it cost the transport and the transported unit 5cm
> of its movement to embark/disembark.
>
> Titan and praetorian movement- they may turn up to 90 degrees in any
> combination per turn.
>
> Walkers- add a column for them in the terrain table. They move as
> infantry except in respect to buildings which are impassible.
>
> Towed artillery- cannot be fired in the turn it becomes unlimbered.
>
> Command units
> HQ units may move on charge orders, but fire in the advance phase. Units
> that move on advance may fire in the first fire phase. This was the
> compromise that was mostly accepted. A poll will be submitted with the
> following options:
>
> 1. Keep rule as is- unit may move on charge orders and fire on first
> fire orders
>
> 2. Proposed change- unit may move on charge orders, but fire in the
> advance phase. Units that move on advance may fire in the first fire
> phase.
>
> Bail out rule
> It will apply to troops transported in fliers IF the troops have jump
> packs or flight packs. Other troop types do NOT get a save.
>
> Troops inside destroyed titans or praetorians do NOT get a bail out save
> if the destruction occurs via a reactor meltdown. IN all other cases
> apply the save.
>
> Snap fire
>
> Several interpretations exist and will be polled. They are:
>
> 1. Some models within the same unit may snap fire while others may save
> their fire until the first fire phase. Models like titans with multiple
> weapons may fire some on snap fire and save others for the first fire
> phase
>
> 2. All models in a detachment MUST fire when using snap fire no shots
> may be saved. This includes titans and praetorians. Special weapons like
> AA are the exception.
>
> 3. Same as above but titans/praetorians may "split" their fire in snap
> fire or first fire.
>
> Snap fire may not be taken by transported units unless otherwise
> specified (such as in Titans and praetorians with transport
> capabilities.
>
> Flyer and fortification rules will be revised after all core rules have
> been finished.
>
> For poll information refer to this post.
>
> Peter
>
>
> 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 Sun Apr 21 2002 - 14:50:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:36 UTC