Re: [Epic] Creating new version of Epic

From: Simon Dodds <c9415355_at_...>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 13:48:15 +1100 (EST)

>1) New flyer rules. I haven't personally run into any problems with
>the rules yet (not fielding any flyers yet myself), but some of the
>things seem pretty silly. Infantry close assaulting flyers? Come on.
>I have seen alternate rules for flyers at
> which are based on
>flyers making passes across the table, similar to Dirtside II, from
>what I hear. Maybe this is the way to go.

I have had a good look at Allen's flyer rules and I quite liked them, but I
havent gotten around to using them yet. Anyone given them a go? If this
works we can build on this.

>2) Clarifications on some weapons interactions. Yes, that means
>Doomweaver vs. void shields. I can hear the groans now. However,
>that's part of our problem with Epic, right? One way or the other, we
>have to come to a conclusion and make it official (or as official as
>this is going to be). Same goes for Dragsta fields. Someone posted a
>list of weapons that ignore them. Was it missing any? A list should
>be formulated and made official.

Great idea. Another thing about weapons, although a minor concern, is that a
certain weapon (eg. battlecannon) can have different ranges and damage
depending on the unit using it.

Putting shields into categories would be a good idea. Also, I was working on
levels of units - underground, ground, skimmer, etc - to clarify problems
such as "if i fire a barrage at some ground troops, does it also hit the
flyer that is directly above those units?"

>3) Firing arcs. This is a minor nit, but it seems to me that limiting
>some of these vehicles to 180 degree firing arcs is silly. Can't a Leman
>Russ's turret turn 360 degrees? Then why can't it fire 360 degrees?
>Maybe certain weapons on a vehicle could be designated as 360 weapons,
>like the Leman Russ's battle cannon.

Good point. At the moment I try to apply common sense to the models. eg -
the lascannons on a land raider could not both fire at something in its
front 180 deg. arc if the target was to the extreme left/right. Maybe, and
yell all you want, we should get all we can from the 40K rules to clarify
all the units we can.

>4) New units. Obviously GW will be releasing new units that have been
>introduced into 40K into Epic. So someone will have to convert them to
>"Net Epic" stats and come up with any necessary cards. For example,
>can the Leman Russ Destructor be bought in company strength or only in
>detachment strength? How many points will they cost? Break point?

Somebody put rules for the Demolisher, Griffon and a few others onto the
mailing list a few months ago. Does anybody have them on-hand at the moment?
Or, even better, has the original author got revised rules for them as I
remember they were still in its infancy.

>5) Reworking movement. Some have commented that having all the units
>of one side move is too unbalanced. There have been talks of
>alternating detachment movement, like firing is alternated. Perhaps
>more than one detachment could be moved at a time.

I dont know if this has been said before, but how does it go in DS2? I am
still yet to see that game.

>Obviously, much more could be added to this list. However, if some
>sort of "gripe list" were maintained, it would help define what
>precisely we are attempting to change and would organize our efforts.

Excellent idea. If someone could post it to the mailing list every now and
then, and I'll update it on the WWW that would be great.

The 6mm rules on the net look very good, but from when I last saw it, it
will be necessary to create stats for all units again. Maybe we can use
these rules and somehow adapt them to the current stats?

I've asked before, but I really need one. Does anybody have an Excel-HTML
converter? I need it to upload my unit stats pages.


Simon Dodds

"Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness?"
Received on Thu Jan 01 1970 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:00 UTC