Re: [Epic] Comments & observations on Epic 40k.

From: Paul Tobia <heresy_at_...>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 11:04:53 -0600 (CST)

On Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Michael the Liu wrote:

[snippage]

> >Oh yeah, 40K "works".
>
> I suppose from a GW point of view it does. If more people will pay money
> for the ability to cheese out an army, then whose GW to say to them that
> they can't? I suppose almost everyone except the people who just want a
> decent wargame are getting what they want.

For those who haven't noticed yet, WH40k is a flagship game for GW. And
as such a hell of a lot of people play it and buy the minis. Now, if you
were GW and were going to release a game in the same setting as this other
game where you already have a huge established base, wouldn't you play up
the link between the two to get some sort of crossover? It's a marketing
ploy, pure and simple.

> >> Now, instead of fielding nameless detachment
> >> cards you can build an army that reflects the army you play in Warhammer
> >> 40,000, bringing a whole new aspect to the game.
>
> Nameless detachment cards. How terrible. It would be so much nicer if I
> could refer to them but easy to remember names like, "the detachment being
> led by Ragnar Blackmane" or "the detachment being led by Abaddon, who
> incidentally has an odd habit of showing up in an astoundingly high
> proportion of games." It sure would be cool if we were limited to only 50%
> of our points going to characters though, help keep it balanced, like in
> 40k. :) Heh, can't wait for that new aspect of the game.

The box you buy on Mar31 will have no personalities (named characters) in
it whatsoever. Of course they could always add thos into a WD article at
a later date.

> >> That's right, this fantastic game will hit the shelves on March 31st, so
> >> start gearing up!
>
> Perhaps they mean start saving up. God knows its going to cost a small
> fortune + your soul.

Retail will be about $70US, fairly comparable to the current boxed sets.

> I bet that they've dropped the manticore and the bombard since they aren't
> in Warhammer 40k! They're similar enough to the basilisk in function that
> they would have abstracted them if they weren't being dropped. (I mean
> c'mon, they claim with abstraction that a Haruspex serves the same purpose
> as a Trygon!)

Actually the difference between the bombard and basilisk is in the game,
one is seige arty, the other is heavy arty.


----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul R. Tobia _O_
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon |
full of tapes hurtling down the highway." (Tanenbaum,1996)
ptobia_at_... http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~heresy
Received on Sat Feb 15 1997 - 17:04:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:08 UTC