Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: Perrin Haley <phaley_at_...>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 22:40:29 -0800

>Hi!
>
>This is a preliminary summary of what is the opinion on movement on
>initiative.
>
>1-It is obvious the majority wants an alternating system for movement
>and most of the posted ones are from 1st edition epic(knowingly or not).
>The exact 1st edition system which was a order of movement dependant on
>the orders given(charge moves first then advance,etc.)was posted and
>also the problems with it have also been debated( so my vipers if given
>advance orders cant be pinned since they move always after charge
>units).The system I proposed is based on unit manuverability and size so
>this problem does not occur.My system has not really been voted against
>so please give your opinion on it with any defects you may visualize.
>If there is no concensus on exactly what type of alternating system to
>be used I suggest that Phillips suggestion of just giving simple
>alternation to the present system be used.

I'll throw my lot in with Phillips on this one; I vote for basically the
same movement system, except for two changes:
1.) Players take turns in moving detachments, with the player who won
Initiative choosing who moves first.

2.) We need some turning restrictions! It is nearly moronic to let a
Collossus (or any SHV or even *anything* except maybe bikes/cavalry) move
all of it's allowance, except for one cm, and then pull a full 360 degree
turn! I can't think of an appropriate formula for cm=turning degrees, but
am up for suggestions.

>2-Regarding vehicle movement and terrain effects the foolowing is what
>seems people would like it to look like.
>
>-Troop stands- no restriction except for immpassible terrain
>-Cavalry(meaning some bipedal or quadruped mode of locomotion)-may move
>through woods at half rate(depending what orders are), this also applies
>to other difficult terrain.
>-Tracked vehicles- may only enter woods in advance orders(and no other)
>at half the advance movement. While in woods must use advance until
>woods are cleared( cannot charge out of woods).This also applies to
>other difficult terrain.
>-Bikes(meaning wheeled vehicles such as ork buggies, space marine bikes,
>squat bikes,etc.)Can move through wood only on advance orders at normal
>rate.
>-Skimmers(refering only to jetbikes as other skimmers are either too
>large or dont have means to physically displace trees-like atracked
>vehicle). They can enter woods only on advanced orders at normal rate.
>I have seen discussions about jet bikes stopping on buildings and other
>impassible terrain-remember if it is impassible to vehicles normally it
>cant stop there these rules apply to difficult terrain where before they
>were not permitted to enter.

Hmmm... I don't know about this. Why not just work off of the existing
system with a few minor changes? Although, I do indeed like your idea
about differentiating between bikes and *real* cavalry. IMO, bikes ought
to be quicker, and in general, better in CC than cavalry, but cavalry ought
to be able to get to places a bike can't (eg: less restricted than a bike
when in woods or rubble.) And what about this ambiguity with Jetbikes: can
they go in woods or not and do they treat it as difficult or easy? (eg:
Think of "Return of the Jedi.") And Vypers? Yeah, I know they are put in
the vehichle section in the back of TL, but c'mon, look at the model! It
is easily as skinny as a Jetbike, just taller. (Sorry about griping about
individual units, it's just that this one always bothered me.) About your
above movement system: I don't agree with how vehichles (albeit tracked)
can go in woods. Some one else already said that this is supposed to be a
special ability, that you pay for (eg: Brass Scorpion and Gorgon.)

>Up to now the system I proposed has been slightly(more like barely)
>accepted in some cases with some addition,please keep commenting on them
>and if any clarification no matter how small is needing just ask-thats
>what I'm here for!

And thank you for being there! (I haven't gotten a chance to say this yet.)

>United we stand!
>Peter

        Perrin

____________________________________________________
"...I could never become a prophet...just
a critic - which is a poor thing at best,
a sort of fourth-rate prophet suffering
from delusions of gender."

        -Jubal Harshaw, "Stranger in a Strange Land"
____________________________________________________
Received on Thu Feb 06 1997 - 06:40:29 UTC

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