Re: [Epic] Stand and Deliver

From: Jason Stephensen <J.Stephensen_at_...>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:51:34 +1000 (EST)

>Well, things have been too quiet on the list. We need something to do :)

We could start up the doomweaver/titan thing again.

>The common argument seems to be the principle of the thing. GW have a
>tradition of continually putting out new versions of rules. Instead of just
>putting out a new book you are forced to get a whole new $100+ boxed set. It
>just goes to show how little they care for their customers (particularly the
>long-term ones)

Ummm... for us it will be $140.00 if you go by the rest of the price increases.

>>It was stated zillions times that the old stands are going to be compatible.
>No, not really. The shape and size of the new stands (about twice as long as
>the current ones) will change things dramatically. The number of stands you
>can have in close combat will diminish. Also, try putting these new stands
>in buildings (especially the ones in the SM box). It has been said that the
>old stands will not be accepted in tournaments, therefore not making them
>officially acceptable. Once I heard something about some product that will
>be available allowing you to join 2 of the small stands together in order to
>make the new ones. This in effect will half the number of stands you have
>and as it costs around $40Aus to get one box of stands (and you usually need
>2-3 anyway - bastards) it is a lovely little money-spinner for GW

Hmmm... I hadn't heard that GW were not going to let you use the old stands
for their cons. I guess that would kinda suck. As for the boxed sets, they
claim the new ones won't need multiples of boxes to make units. Which would
be nice.

>True, there are a few new items of interest in the new Epic (or Epic97 as I
>like to think of it, along the lines of Microsoft). The new army structure
>is annoying mainly because it makes the possibility of cheddar (for want of
>a word) much bigger. Epic is not 40K, Epic is Epic, but GW seem to see it as
>a good point that Epic97 will be a lot more like 40K. Also it makes all the
>supplements that we have useless. There are some new models coming out,
>good, but there are also a few models that seem to be disappearing.

That's one of the things that worries me, making epic "little" 40K, when
IMHO 40K has a hepa of troubles when compared to similar 25mm sci fi game
systems. And if they want to bring the chees into a game that is almost
cheddar free, well that would be a bad thing. I think that the reasoning
behind the name change is that 40K is so popular, and their biggest money
spinner that the epic "40K" bit will drag people across. We've even
speculated that some young kids will buy it seeing 40K thinking it's an
expansion and getting really shitty when they find the little figures inside.

>>Maybe you know some things that I don't, but I don't see so many reasons to
>>be that pessimist about Epic 3.
>>Can somebody give me those reasons ?
>There are good points but a lot of bad points. It's up to each person to
>find the balance and make their decision on that. Currently I cant seem to
>justify the cost. I would like to see the new rules but in order to see one
>book I would need to buy a box that costs over $100 (prices here in Oz are

Oh, yeah. For just a boxed set, I can buy a fleet for full thrust, an army
for warzone or a fleet for harpoon. Or a boxed set? Hmmmm.... I personally
think that the prices are not only unforgivable, but just plain suicidal.
The constant price hikes have seen 40K tipped as the game people seem to be
playing. My new club has been overtaken and now swamped by warzone. There
was one game of 40K compared to about 6 games of warzone. GW better get
their act together or they'll be losing their main money spinner. Mind you
they could do what they do to most of their British rivals, put 'em out of
business by hook or by crook.
Whoops, I didn't say that

>Get comfy, everyone. This debate is going to take a while.

Cool. Nothing like one of these. Me I hope epic 40K, is great. They do have
the better people doing it.

>Simon Dodds
>"Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness?"
                 Colonel Abrahms, 22nd NU-Atol Regiment
                 Rekartot Redbacks Senior Coach
                   "No Spanky, No. Bad monkey"
                email J.Stephensen_at_...
Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:08:58 UTC