Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: <earndtrp_at_...>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1997 08:22:36 +0800

On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Seth Ben-Ezra wrote:

> I have comments on two parts of Peter's initial posting. The first is
> regarding movement and unit facing. As I recall, the facing of the
> model is based on the direction in which it was moving last, varying
> by 45 degrees either way. What my group has usually played is that
> facing can be changed by the expenditure of 1 cm of movement. I
> haven't been playing for very long and might be missing something, but
> this solution seems to work reasonably well and minimizes extra rules.
> As far as skimmers go, GW has always said that their rules regarding
> their ending a turn on impassable terrain were made merely because of
> the model's inability to balance on the terrain. If that's the only
> reason, then I say that we eliminate that silly rule. I think that we
> can all work around the physical limitations of the models. :)
>
Nice idea, but remember that in reality people and bikes don't carry 10'
plastic slabs beneath them. You also neglect that it would be difficult
for a jetbike to hover safely on the roof of a building or a shear rock
face. That is why skimmers can't end their move in impassible terrain,
not simply becasue the model doesn't fit.

 
> As for the alternating movement system, in general I like it.
> Personally, I would want to see the optional rule regarding the
> initiative winner's option to move last. Use of this system, as Peter
> pointed out, would encourage use of infantry and "small" units as
> opposed to super-heavies or Titans. Possibly, though, all orders that
> would be used in a phase could be revealed at one time. So, all Titan
> orders would be revealed before Titans movement is resolved. That
> seems reasonable, because commanders would be able to anticipate
> the actions of opposing units somewhat, but not fully.

I like the suggestion from a while back about moving all chargers
together, then advnce, and the command units. (Or command units in either
movement section). A possible variation on this to eliminate the
advantage of moving second is to say that whoever charges second advances
first.

Y'alls Whatever
Ryan P Arndt
Received on Tue Feb 04 1997 - 00:22:36 UTC