Re: [Epic] Net Epic Gudelines

From: nethol <nethol_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:37:33 +0200

----------
> From: Mark A Shieh <SHODAN+_at_...>
> To: space-marine_at_...
> Subject: Re: [Epic] Net Epic Gudelines
> Date: 12 �ubat 1997 18:17
>
> Excerpts from Epic: 12-Feb-97 Re: [Epic] Net Epic Gudelines by
> "nethol"_at_...
> [Titan Point Costs]
> > > >I will be continuing on this bit, but I would like some of your
input,
> > too!
> > >
> > > This is a good suggestion from a game ballance position, but...
> > > While some of us are happy doing the math and min maxing our
forces...
> > > A lot of others aren't.
> > >
> > Yes, it is so for a lot of others, but not for us, who are intelligent
> > enough to design a game of strategy here. The point is to apply the
above
> > formulas (or like) to the weapons to prepare fixed cost tables like
those
> > of all the regular units, so that the *less gifted ones* can benefit,
and
> > play a logically balanced game.
>
>
> Excerpts from Epic: 12-Feb-97 Re: [Epic] Net Epic - Close.. by
> "nethol"_at_...
> >> From: Jyrki Saari <js54904_at_...>
> >> > 1st edition also has some nice modifiers for close combat and
> >separates
> >> > vehicle -vs- infantry melees. Here is the close combat table:
> >This would make CC more and more complicated and slower. More and more
like
> >40K too!
>
> I'm sorry, but I hardly consider myself to be less intelligent for
> wanting to abstract out certain parts of combat in combat on a scale
> like Epic. I also see a glaring inconsistency in your argument, as
> Titan Weapon costs also make the game more complicated, slower, and more
> like 40k.
>
> That said, I like having lots of optional rules, like Titan Weapon
> costs. I can try to dredge out of my mailbox the list I posted for
> Eldar Titan weapons a few months back. The figures were all fudged off
> the top of my head, but seemed about right, and those in favor of Titan
> Weapon costs seemed to like it.
>
> Mark

Well Mark, first of all, I think haven't stated that holders of one class
of opinion are less intelligent than the others. If I have, then I
apologize. That message was aiming to capture the humorous tone of the
reply of Agro to Brett.

Although two arguments seem to work opposite ways, it is not entirely so
(ie my favouring of pricing Titan weapons and objecting to CC modifiers).

Titans are more like walking weapon platforms or fortifications (a lot like
today's aircraft carriers or battleships) than individual units. The
armament they carry greatly affect their combat strength, and I think the
differences should be reflected in points costs. The situation is analogous
to pricing the Capitol Imperialis 900 points higher and letting you have
*any two* imperial companies with it without paying any more on the troops.
Putting in two bike companies (600 pts) and two tactical companies (1200
pts) would be greatly different. Thus it would be much better to price the
vehicle and the troops seperately. Likewise, buying Titan weapons seperate
from the Titan would make a more clear-cut game. Remember that, the costs
would be pre-calculated, they won't be computed in every game. What Brett
introduces is a way to calculate this costs one-and-for-all.

On the other hand, the close combat modifiers bring in a complication to
the CC segment within the game itself. They have to be computed *real time*
in each confrontation in the game. If you apply such modifiers, resolving
hand-to-hand combat would take much longer than present, while certainly
adding realism to the game. My opinion is that while designing a game we
should draw bottom and top lines for complexity/realism and
simplicity/playability. If we go too much for the former what we get would
be a well designed simulation rather than an easily playable game (what
makes Epic so attractive).

S. Birol Akmeric

nethol_at_...
Received on Thu Feb 13 1997 - 09:37:33 UTC