Re: [Epic] The Hobby

From: Bill Provick <bprovick_at_...>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 21:16:28 -0400

>But at the same time, I still feel it is the game that you are
>playing, not
>the minis. This is one of the reasons that I try to pick the most
>vanilla
>force I possibly can when I play a game of Epic. All the exotic "I
>shoot
>first and win" stuff dopes not interest me at all- I get REALLY pissed
>off
>when GW tries to sell their products by calling them "super powerful,
>kick ass troops". What's the point of choosing troops and playing a
>game if you need super powerful troops to do it with? One of these
>days I'll play a game of Epic with nothing but tactical troops; no
>psykers, and maybe one or two captains. And I'll probably win,
>because I am one that believes in firm tactics, not powerful troops.

All Psykers do is add +1 to assault. I only have two Librarian models, so it
suits me fine. I agree with the idea that power gaming ruins a game, but I
do think psykers are part of "firm tactics" Good point, bad example. I don't
think that many of the marine troops can be consider "munchy" but I haven't
played that much.

I personally am in the middle of painting my army, and would like to play a
couple games before school starts. Now i've been slugging my way along, and
have all my tactical marines finished, does this mean I only should play
with them?

Sure, playing against a grey army can be annoying. But to the point of not
letting them play, or limiting myself because troops were not painted,
that's just crazy. If they're gonna get painted, as far as I'm concerned,
they're painted

Tyler
Received on Sun Aug 17 1997 - 01:16:28 UTC