Note: Attempting to tone down flame level. I have had a _wierd_ time
over the last 5-7 days, having nothing to do with 6 mm games in general.
Brett Hollindale wrote:
> >> >I was actually thinking that e40k was disliked because it required
> >> >thought, which is evidently missing on the newsgroup.
> >> >Steve
> >>
> >> Sorry Steve, but nothing could be further from the truth.
> >>
> >In your opinion.
>
> Yes, "in my opinion" - but are you suggesting that you agree that
> "thought is evidently missing from the news group" or that "E40K was disliked
> because it required thought" or both?
>
Well, I quit reading the news group because the signal to noise level
was not in my favor. I don't play ANY 28 mm scale GW games, so even
most on topic posts are, well, noise.
> >Not true in either case. In the case of E40K, while it is true that the
> >number of nit picky details has been lowered it is hardly homogenous
> >gruel.In the case of 1st Ed, it had Space Marines, Imperial Guard,
> >Orks, Eldar, Squats, Knights, Eldar Knights and Chaos. The only thing
> >it DIDN'T have was 'Nids.
>
> You may possibly by correct in what you say. 1st edition is actually
> before my time, but I do have a copy of what I always thought was the
> original space marine rule book (hence "first edition"). It is predominantly
> black in colour with a chaos eye on the back cover. There are only two
> races available - Marines, and Traitor (Chaos) Marines. There is absolutely
> no difference in any facet of their armies, command structure or points
> costings. (It may be dull, but at least it's fair...) This is the
> rule book that I and numerous others on the list refer to as "1st edition".
> This is the rule book I was refering to above and I assure you that you
> have only two race choices...
>
To be accurate, they were Traitor Marines, not Chaos Marines. The "long
war" had not started yet, and they had not fled into the Eye Of Terror
and been changed by the Chaos Powers. While the leadership had turned
to Chaos, the marines were still run of the mill space grunts, with no
mutant looks or abilities.
The problem with Space Marine 1st ed. is that the rules were spread out
over 3 published rules set and a half a dozen issues of WD. Of course
the 2nd ed was spread out over what, 2 box sets and AoI, Warlords,
Renegades, & Hive War, plus a half a dozen or so issues of WD.
For giggles and grins I am going to count up different unit types given
in the BASIC RULES for all 5 version of SM (that would include FL and WD
100 version) and post the list. No add on or WD issues. I suspect that
the results may suprise us all. In this context a different unit is one
that either has a least one statistic changed from other similar units.
Of course there is Space Marine 0th edition, published in WD 100 or
there about. Some major weird stuff there.
<major amount of snipage happens here>
>
> >And yes I want war games to
> >resemble real war, less the personal bleeding thing.
>
> We agree on the personal bleeding thing, but "realism" strikes me as
> an odd thing to be looking for in a science FICTION game. Me, I'll settle
> for "fun".
>
There is realism and there is realism. I do expect that larger weapons
should as a general rule out range smaller ones. I expect that any game
that is NOT about wearing your hat sidewise with your fingers over your
naval that artillery should out range any thing else in the game. 2nd
and 3rd ed's biggest shared flaw is the lack of off board support.
Something that 1st ed had. But this is not the "re fighting Waterloo"
rant, this is another one. Not sure what to call it.
> >
> >
> >
> >> If you want a real challenge, try playing a dozen games of SM/TL using the
> >> random army generation charts posted a few weeks ago. Winning a game with
> >> what are usually considered "useless" units IS a tactical challenge I assure
> >> you...
> >This I will give you sound like fun. I may do just that. Of course I
> >will also see what happens when I do the same thing with E40K. I know
> >what will present the greater "real" tactical challenge, vs "game"
> >challenge.
>
> I have to concede that your mind is much more open than mine. I will
> never play E40K - ever! (Unless something mundanely important is somehow
> involved) But I'm sure that this surprises no one ;-)
>
Matt you up to playing a series of weird games next weekend?
--
Sillyness is the last refuse of the doomed. P. Opus
http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GAT d-- s:- a38 US++ P+ L+ E W+++ N++ K++ w++ O- M- V-- PS+ PE++ Y PGP
t++
5 X R+++ tv+ b++++ DI+++ D G+ e+ h--- r+++ y+++(**)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Received on Tue Feb 24 1998 - 14:44:22 UTC