RE: [Epic] Epic 40k _at_$%!

From: Andy Skinner <andy.skinner_at_...>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 97 17:05:00 EST

Peter:
>things are done.Besides I generally prefer a frontal dialogue (in this
>case in front of the computer dialogue) instead of-I'll change things
>and you have no say diet that GW usually feeds us. As a matter of fact a
>polite direct conversation about Epic 40k would have given this soon to
>be out game a much better image than what it has now.
Sometime last year they did ask us for what important
issues we wanted addressed. They knew they were making
a big change, so they asked for us not to suggest minor
rules changes. Whether any input made a difference, I
have no idea. They also sent a note on September 16
(my son's birthday!) about comments they had seen on
the net, partly provoked by a rabid GW employee talking
about throwing away your old minis and starting over.

I can't remember what happened about collecting issues
for change. Did we send 'em a list?

So they have spoken to us to some extent. Just for grins,
I'll include Jervis' note from September.

I'm still looking forward to hearing what the game is really
like, though I don't know whether I'll buy it. I do want
some of those Land Raiders, though. :-)

andy
andy.skinner_at_...



 ----------
From: owner-space-marine[SMTP:owner-space-marine_at_...]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 1996 10:55 AM
To: space-marine
Subject: [Epic] P: Gee, You Guys! (Long)

Considering some of the rather, erm, less well-considered comments about
what we might or might not going to be doing with Epic that I've seen on
this list (yes, that means _you_ Julian!), I thought I'd better fire off
this message to set you minds at rest, at least a little bit.

OK, first off, all of your old miniatures will be compatible with the new
system. We're going to be remaking quite a few of the models, but this is
in order to improve the level of detailing on the models, not change
their
scale or anything like that. We're doing this because we constantly try
to
improve the quality of the models we make; nothing can stand still, I'm
afraid, no matter how much some may want it to. The bottom line is that
you
don't have to cast your old models 'into the warp', or anything like it.
You'll just get great new models to add to those you've already
collected.

The new army lists allow you to build detachments on a unit by unit
basis,
thus allowing you to field formations that *can* be organised along the
same lines as a 40K army. Note the word can, please! If you want to stick
to the detachment types used in the current edition of Epic, then you can
do so if you want, it's up to you. The primary reason for changing the
way
the lists works is to strengthen the link between Epic and 40K in terms
of
the background, i.e. the 'compatibility' we're looking for between the
two
games is one of background _not_ rules mechanics.

Assault combat is more important in the new edition of Epic *not* because
it causes greater casualties than is the case in the current edition of
the
game (if anything assaults are less bloody with the new rules), but
because
the side that loses is forced to retreat and give up ground. Actually, it
was watching news footage of the Chechen (sp?) crisis that drove home
this
point to Andy and myself; there was a siege of a Chechen village, and the
Russians had _pounded_ the place for days with artillery, aircraft and
long-range fire, but when it came right down to it, they had to assault
the
place in order to capture it. The same thing happened in the Gulf, in the
end the army had to go into Kuwait and kick the Iraqi's out! This is one
of
the things we've tried to capture in the new Epic rules, that it you want
to capture a piece of real estate you need to go in there and take it,
which in games terms means launching an assault. While on the subject of
assaults, we assume they include all forms of close combat, i.e.
short-range fire-fights and shoot-outs as well as hand to hand combat.

Finally, what you will categorically *not* try and do is write a set of
rules that attempts to plug every loop-hole and cover every conceivable
eventuality that may occur on the tabletop. Why not? Because we know that
it can't be done; you simply can't cover every possible thing that will
arise in a tabletop game. Instead of attempting to achieve what we think
is
the impossible, we try to write rules that are easy to understand, and
where the *intent* behind the rule is as clear as it possibly can be. I'm
not saying we're perfect at this and that we don't make mistakes, but I
do
know we're better at it than anybody else. Our task in future rule books
is
to make it clear to players that if they understand the intent of a rule,
then attempting to exploit it in a way they *know* it's not intended is
going completely against the spirit of the game itself.

And here we come to an extremely important point. One thing that has
become
increasingly clear to us is that if there is one serious failing in each
of
the current editions of our core games (Warhammer, Warhammer 40,000 and
Epic), then its that we don't spend enough time explaining to people
about
the spirit and attitude they should bring to the tabletop when the play
them. This has resulted in a lot of players looking at the stuff we do as
being a game which they play 'just to win'. Future editions of our games
will explore the myriad different possibilities of the hobby in greater
depth, and will hopefully free players from the rather limited view that
all you can do is line up to equal point armies and fight the same
scenario
over and over again. We'll try to get across the fact that there's really
a
lifetimes worth of possibilities waiting out there for players to explore
and enjoy. What's more, once you get your head round the concept of what
the hobby is *really* about, then silly niggly little rules questions
suddenly become a lot less important.

I know by now some of you will be saying something along the lines of "oh
well, that's all very well and good, but in the real world it's not like
that". We understand and appreciate this point of view, and we know that
quite a lot of people, especially outside the UK, play our games 'just to
win'. However, we're doing our best to change this attitude with articles
like the J Files and Stillmania in WD, by publishing the Citadel Journal,
and, as I've already said, we will make sure that any future editions of
our games spend much more time explaining what the hobby is really about
to
new players.

However we can't turn round players attitudes all on our own; we need
experienced players like you to lead by example as well. That's right,
_you_ need to get out there and help lead new players into the light.
Show
them what makes this hobby really special and unique. Set up campaigns,
or
design some interesting one-off scenarios for your group to play.
Experiment with house rules, invent your own rules, and even use rules
sets
published by other companies if you want, we won't mind (well, OK, we'll
mind a bit if you use other people's rules : )). Run painting classes. Go
along to games conventions and run participation games. Set up
tournaments
if you can stand the aggravation (they're still the best way of
introducing
a whole bunch of players to new opponents). In other words don't just
rely
on us to do everything for you; *take* the stuff we provide and the new
people we've got interested in the hobby, and then use these as a
starting
point to build the type of hobby _you_ want to be a part of.

Hope that helps.

Jervis


primarchs_at_...

*Disclaimer* This stuff is just our own opinions - it ain't official
until
it's in print!
Received on Fri Feb 07 1997 - 22:05:00 UTC