Re: [Epic] Net epic

From: Jason Robinson <ewing_at_...>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:21:45 +0200 (EET)

 Just my quiet little voice into the Net Epic project...

On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Peter Ramos wrote:
> UNIT COHERENCY
> I guess the current 6 cm works okay. About how support cards interact
> with their parent company cards( as in ork clans would be the prime
> example) will be discussed with the appropiate army.

 The 6 cm has worked ok, so I'll vote for this.

> UNIT MOVEMENT
> This system basically represents historic movement possibilities for
> things like foot, track movement and represents are more realistic
> approach to more manuvearble anti-grav vehicles(no I am not an eldar
> fan!).This gives pros and cons to each movement type: skimmers move
> quicker in difficult terrain but only tracked vehicles can make real
> fighting retreats(firing while moveing backwards).

 Umm.. I think the current system, that bikes and cavalry can move
 through woods at half rate is good. I think jet bikes should be able
 to move into woods at half rate too, but they can't pop up while
 in the woods. They can fly over at no penalty.

> FOLLOWING IS A ALTERNATING MOVEMENT SYSTEM THAT IS A FIRST SECOND
> EDITION HYBRID
> The movement phase is broke down as follows:
> Phase 1:Titans and super heavy vehicles
> Phase 2:Models of the Khight class (greater deamons, carnifex etc.)
> Phase 3:All vehicles that dont belong to the above classes
> Phase 4:Troop stands(which includes cavalry/bike type stands)
> Movement in each phase is alternating the player who wins initiatives
> decides to either move first or make opponent move first then alternate
> afterwards.

 This kind of moving might make problems with CC. At least in the
 current epic system, moving last with light assault units is
 usually favorable as their targets can't escape. I suppose this
 would be partially countered by first fire units giving snap fire
 supporting fire.
 What about giving units on advance a chance to shoot at chargers too,
 with a minus or two to the roll?

 About movement generally:
 We use a system where we count the units on both sides at the start
 of the battle and then take that many cards for both sides (we use
 Magic the (money)Gathering land cards). In the beginning of every
 turn the deck is shuffled and a card is picked for each move in
 the movement phase. There is no iniative roll.
 This system creates a more even system for moving, but doesn't
 really give much of an advantage to bigger armies. We use the
 same system for firing, so big armies will get to shoot earlier,
 but they will also move much earlier. Armies that use a lot of
 first fire, will most likely move their units first.
 
 Btw, I like the phase system otherwise. The system about only
 showing the current phases order counters would also be great.

> SNAP FIRE
> Any unit on first fire orders may interrupt movement to resolve fire.
> The exception is that another unit may not interrupt a unit that is snap
> firing. Please note we will not discuss present edition snap fire units
> these will be covered with flyers. This is to keep these unit "special
> snap fire distinct from general snap fire (we will probably call it AA
> fire to avoid confusion).

 I think normal units snap firing on first fire should have at least
 a minus or two (depending on what dice is used :)). Or better, give
 them a minus if their target is moving rapidly (ie. charging).
 Units firing while in the middle of their move should get some minus
 also, otherwise there would be no point in setting down on good fire
 lines.

> TRANSPORT
> The present rules for embarking/disembarking troops has sometimes caused
> difficulty due to how much movement is left to troop stands after the
> vehicle has moved. I really dont have any comments on this one ,but
> someone might have a better solution.

 I think the current system works fine.
 Maybe infantry riding in vehicles could be given some sort of save
 against destruction though. Something like 5+, depending on vehicle
 size, in the current system?

         - Jason
Received on Mon Feb 03 1997 - 22:21:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:05 UTC