Re: [NetEpic ML] What ever happened to Heresy

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 12:11:42 -0500

Hi!

> Like in DSII, sounds good.

I think games in general must evolve to this way of play. It keeps both
players atentive to the game since you constantly act and react. GW
insists in the you-go-I-go mentality which we have reduced in netepic
with alternate activation, but "phases" are still there. As much as I
like orders, I think they slow play and simple activation move and fire
are far better.

> I have been dying to try it out, but once again my lack of opponents has
> prevented this. I read the rules again and see if anything pops out.
> However, I seem to recall I was so impressed with the rules when I read them
> that I didn't find any mentionable defects.

Hehe, I know what you mean, but I plan to convince Darius to try a game
at some point, with the new changes. I especially like the command and
control and the simple way we deal with suppression. Also the fire
resolution and close combat finally yield results that make sense. The
close combat rules draw heavily from standard historical board games
with a "odds" table and shifts, but finally morale and command play a
role in who wins close combat and not just who has the higher "CAF".

Also the skill system is a plus, it lets you give character to all the
armies without any special rules, which is Heresy forte, no special
rules at all. Even titans obey the same simple rules.

> How are you going to redo the artillery?

I bascially copied netepic's barrage sheme, which isn't bad, but does
not fit the "feel" for these rules either. I wanted a more "realistic"
approach. Each artillery unit fires a certain shell (HEF or MAK) and
does the same damage according to ordinance. The more units in a battery
the more area or concentration of fire ocurrs. Netepic addresses this
somewhat, but not fully. What I want is that the more peices in a
battery you can either cover more "bombardment ground" or narrow the
focus and increase kills. I'm doing this by essentially eliminating the
to hit roll. After all the main problem for artillery is target
acqusition. Heresy already as built in spoting rules as a extension of
its command control rules. So why make it difficult for artillery to
acquire targets AND have to roll to hit to? To redundant. Once artillery
falls in the general area of a target it HAS already "hit" it, now
casualties are a factor of it ability to do damage or in Heresy terms
Penetration. In my change artillery's main problem is to coordinate the
accuracy of its fire with is command control related, once it falls into
an area casualties are determined by its penetration (as per ordinance
type). After all flamer templates do not need to hit in Heresy once
placed they roll only for penentration, why should artillery templates
be any different? It makes artillery strong, but it is expensive and
totally dependent on command and control tha are NOT housed with the
actual artillery battery, but in separate units (as in real life). So as
in reality you mess up your opponents command and control and his
artillery is nullified, even though you haven't destroyed the actual unit.

> I'll see what I can do. However, recently several more time-eaters have
> popped up in my life (like our secondborn, my graduation thesis which I
> should be doing at this very moment, software testing at work... ) so I
> can't quarantee anything.

No problem. I'll make the changes and send you the draft for input.
While I need to finish other net epic projects of greater priority, once
those done I'll revisit Heresy in much more depth, I think its a great game.

Peter
Received on Fri Mar 02 2001 - 17:11:42 UTC