Re: [Epic] Epic scale, rant and rave - long -
[snip]
If you have problems looking down at the game table and telling 2 weapon
systems apart (for that matter telling 10+ weapon systems apart) you
really should not be war gaming. The argument that having more than one
kind of support weapon makes the game "to complex" really is missing the
point.
I guess I was making too many comparisons to 'larger scale' games.
What I was geting at was that E40k has a more sweeping feel than SM/TL
as the rules didn't get in the way. Also, there ARE comparisons to
DBA in the way weapons have been placed by tactical use rather than
individual detail. My opinion basically.
As for not having more than one kind of support platform, I'm all for
sticking in all kinds of models, but feel that GW have just combined
the individual effects. This leads to you fielding as many different
models as you want for Support weapons, but you'll find that when they
all fire the effect is the same as x Anti-tank shots, or whatever.
THAT is why I'm not fussed about losing individual rules for Mole
Mortars, Thudd Guns, etc.
If anyone else is into different rules, I suggested some (slight)
variants off the top of my head... the point I was getting at there
was it's all well saying:
"the system sucks"
or
"I want lots of weapon types"
but I'd rather see:
"this is where the system falls down...blah blah"
(which is what I'd like to know)
or
"Here's some ideas for weapon variants"
(which I've added to already)
In other words CONSTRUCTIVE criticisms of the rules, something that's
debatable and worthy of reading.
Yes, I've probably taken this more personally than it's meant, but I
want to see the list used constuctively. It's not worth subscribing
to just to hear people bitch about things.
o
-Andy-
Received on Sun Nov 09 1997 - 16:21:37 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:02 UTC