Re: [NetEpic ML] New member-

From: domgarnett <domgarnett_at_...>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 07:44:24 -0000

Hello again,
I am in Exeter, so that could be a possibility.
Especially if people are playing NetEpic.

You'll have to let me know when/where etc... you could either e-mail
me or put something on the forum.

Thanks for the shout,
Dom
 
--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, warren coleman <bunnycoleman2002@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Dom,
> Where in the SW are you?
> If you are anywhere near Plymouth there are two very active clubs,
Plymouth Association of Wargamers and Crossed Swords.  There is
occassional Epic at PAW but CS play epic almost every meet, the are a
GW heavy club.
> Let me know
> Bunny
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: domgarnett <domgarnett_at_...>
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, 4 August, 2008 10:41:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] New member-
>
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> Lots to take in, but I think the best way to learn would surely be
to
> play someone!
>
> Particularly interested in some rule changes- I think popular
> agreement and modifications can only be a good thing. I like the
idea
> of "Titan building" for example- far better for customization and
> accurate/fair points values. Personally I thought that
> titan "companies" -groups of three usually- were rather cheap in
> SM2/titan legions- has this changed too therefore?
>
> I take it I can also still build my army in the same fashion, ie:
> company card, then add supports/special card?
>
> The hidden orders system also seems like a good development -for me
> one of the most exciting bits of SM2 was putting up a screen before
> deployment and then having the surprise element of suddenly seeing
> the enemy positions.
>
> Anyway- would be good to hear from any other players, and
especially
> anyone in the SW!!
>
> Dominic
>
> --- In netepic_at_yahoogroups .com, Peter Ramos <pramos10@ .> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > domgarnett wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Net Epic Fans,
> > >
> > > Good to see a few people still playing epic based on the best
> set of
> > > rules! 2nd Edition "Space Marine" was my favourite game of all
> time.
> > > In fact, even though I'm probably old enough to know better, I
> would
> > > like to play again.
> >
> > Welcome to the group!
> > >
> > > So what has really changed? Is Net Epic pretty much 2nd
edition,
> plus
> > > extra rules? And is there still a decent core of gamers out
> there?
> >
> > You can download the latest set of rules in the files section of
> the
> > yahoo group. While the core mechanics remain the same there have
> been
> > LOTS of changes. This is a very brief summary:
> >
> > Here are the main NetEpic Highlights.
> >
> > 1. At its core it uses the SM2/TL. This means orders (first fire,
> > charge, advance and fallback). To hit values, weapons with "x"
> numbers
> > of attack dice and a save modifier applied as a penalty to the
> targets
> > armor save. Beyond that, the details and even some core mechanics
> have
> > changed so much as not to have any similarity with its roots.
> >
> > 2. Unlike Sm2/TL is has "alternating" activation. I really
> dislike "you
> > go I go" mechanics that GW is fond of. In Netepic you choose one
> unit to
> > reveal its orders then move it. It does not resolve combat until
> that
> > phase (which is also alternating) , but unlike E:A you don't move
> and
> > resolve the combat action which is what true modern alternating
> > activations look like.
> >
> > 3. Fog of war. Order are held secret (unturned) until the moment
> the
> > unit actually moves. This was a simple but highly effective way
of
> > introducing uncertainty into thee game without cumbersome
> mechanics. In
> > the original SM rules you would reveals all your orders thus
seeing
> what
> > the opponent would do. Coupled with "I go you go" nature of
> movement it
> > was too static and predictable. Now, guessing keeps you on your
> toes and
> > a nice action/reaction ensues during play keeping players
involved.
> This
> > probably is one of the best things we did for the game.
> >
> > 4. Overwatch (snap fire). We brought this back from the first
> edition
> > rules. A tactical game just isn't complete without a manner of
> > interdicting movement. I was surprised SM2 didn't use this rule.
It
> was
> > easy to add to the game and the benefits are very tactical in
> nature and
> > did not unbalance the system.
> >
> > 5. Titans. For many this is the aspect that draws them to the
game.
> The
> > mighty lords of destruction blasting all before it. Of course
most
> > incarnations of the game failed to deliver this (Sm2/TL
included).
> The
> > only game version in my opinion that got the titan rules "right"
> was
> > first edition AT. Those who played under that system know what I
> mean,
> > titans were TOUGH, until hit by another titan... which is the
point!
> >
> > We borrowed heavily from that system. Netepic re-introudced the
> titan
> > build system. You buy an empty chassis and "arm" you titan. This
> > determines cost and VP yield. SM/TL had a silly system where all
> titans
> > cost the same regardless of weapons. All weapons are NOT created
> equal,
> > thus cost should vary.
> >
> > We also modified the titan weapons to be more like their AT
> equivalents.
> > We brought back the titan "electrohulls" (point defense), no
longer
> > would titans be easy meat for hordes of lowly infantry.
> >
> > Another popular rule was are changes to the eldar holofields and
> their
> > vulnerability to barrage weapons, which made them unfieldable
under
> > standard SM2 rules. While they still ignore holofields they now
> ALWAYS
> > scatter (you can "lock on to it"), thus phantoms now grace the
> tabletops
> > once more....
> >
> > Titans are now worth their points. They are tough, not
> invulnerable, but
> > tough.
> >
> > 6. Praetorians and super heavies. The rules for these in SM2
> were...well
> > ... awful... A single hit and failed save would kill the mighty
> Capitol
> > Imperialis.. .. no good. Some Super heavies were worth the price
of
> > titans, why treat them as a lesser class?
> >
> > Under Netepic these guys have templates to determine hit
locations,
> just
> > like titans. They are now worth their points and this also made
the
> > squat army very competitive versus titan heavy armies.
> >
> > "Smaller" super heavies like the baneblade have a more
streamlined
> > damage table. Not as good as praetorians, but worth their points.
> >
> > The name Praetorians is the very old (first edition era) name for
> things
> > on the size of the Leviathan and CI.
> >
> > 7. Psy system. One of the things people liked about SM/TL were
all
> the
> > neat powers or "spells" different psychic units could do.
> >
> > The system was quite unbalanced as GW put it out. NetEpic
> eliminated the
> > extra psychic phase introduced by TL and strictly defined what
> power can
> > and cannot do.
> >
> > This eliminated a lot of confusion and arguments that these
powers
> > during play caused.
> >
> > 8. One "feature" of netepic is that pretty much everything ever
> produced
> > by GW has rules for it, including FW models. IF there is a model
> for it,
> > NetEpic will make rules for it. One guideline we strive to follow
> is
> > that we NEVER eliminate models or units. People invest time and
> money in
> > their armies, we won't deny them the use of them by deleting
stuff.
> >
> > We have included some armies GW never made like Slann and a
> different
> > take of the Necrons (besides the currently more GW faithful
Necron
> lists).
> >
> > I know there are quite a few UK people in the group whom play
> netepic,
> > hopefully they will post a reply.
> >
> > >
> > > I am based in SW England and have a large, fully painted ork
> army which
> > > sadly hasn't seen a good battle for several years. Question is,
> where
> > > can I get a game?
> > >
> > > Dominic
> > >
> >
> > Peter
> >
>
Received on Tue Aug 05 2008 - 07:44:24 UTC