Hi!
Fred, long time no see, glad to see you still about!
Well, there are no stupid question, and this one least of all. Actually
its the most frequent question I answer.
The two games are different beasts, each stresses different aspects of
the gaming continuum. Epic 40k, abstracts many aspects of individual
weapons and rules for those weapons into firepower. There are specialty
forms of it like anti-tank weapons and super heavy weapons. There is no
distinction, other than range, between the firepower of one weapon and
others. They are cross referenced in a table were you see how many
"attack dice" you are entitled to for a given amount of firepower.
Things like terrain and blast markers influence the final amount of
"attack dice" on the table. Blast markers is a smart way to show the
effects of suppression, as combat effectiveness is lost as blast markers
acumulate. Close combat is much the same, totalling up modifiers and
rolling off against the opponent and then seeing what "to hit" number
you need to kill troops. The bigger the victory the lower your to hit
and the higher his is. Army construction is akin to most GW games, buy
by the model or small group of models then "upgrade" them by paying
point. You customize to taste. There are no army cards. Victory is
attained by making your opponent lose morale points, accomplished by
killing troops or achieving the goal in a scneario. Whoever falls below
zero first loses.
Overall the movement is much more common since the range of weapons is
very small in comparison to net epic. This stimulates manuever, battles
tend to be "close-contact" affairs. There is no armor distinction like
in netepic. Infantry and vehciels can have the same armor stat. Since
weapons are "firepower" there are no weapons modifiers.
As you can see it is VERY different from netepic. Wether you like it or
not depends on what level of abstraction you are willing to tolerate.
Some players (mostly ork and chaos) are of the opnion that the rules
took away a lot of the armies "fun" and "character", but attempts have
been made to fill those gaps. Currently the AT II movement seems to be
going back to the "more detail" theme and some of that is rubbing off on
the regular rules too.
Like most net epic players, the abstraction in weapons armor and lack of
detail made us not prefer that system, but like I said, it depends on
what your tolerance is for streamlining this or that. It boils down to
personal taste.
You can hang out at the epic group at yahoo groups to ask more specific
questions from epic40k enthusiasts. While they cover all epic forms the
conversation is predominately epic40k.
It's always good to try out another system. At the very least, you'll
appreciate more the one you play now.
Peter
fredrik_berggren_at_... wrote:
> this might be a bit of a stupid question but... what is the biggest
> differences between NetEpic and the latest version of GW Epic? I used
> to play SM and then moved on to NetEpic when the latest release came.
> I never even bothered to look at it. can anybody fill me in?
>
> //fred
>
>
>
> 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 Thu Mar 08 2001 - 00:30:15 UTC