Re: [Epic] Rants. Was SM/TL vs E40K unit costs

From: chadtaylor <chadtaylor_at_...>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 09:00:38 -0500

----------
> From: Stephen Sheldon <stephes_at_...>
> To: space-marine_at_...
> Subject: Re: [Epic] Rants. Was SM/TL vs E40K unit costs
> Date: Wednesday, March 04, 1998 6:01 PM
>
> > 1) My name is not Chric, and it was my rant.
>
> apologies, to both of you (and the sp. mistake)
>
> > 2) If you want to have pretty looking colors and like that, fine, if
you
> > want to have "command" elements that can eat my lunch by themselves AND
> > are immune to be shoot at, what sort of a game is that.
> >
> IT'S A GAME...
> Steve
>
> --

Exactly (thought I would say hello to all by getting into this one :) !

Look, the whole GW thing is screwed up - but it is a game. It is not a
simulation of real combat. It does not follow the rules the rest of the
world does/would. It has NEVER claimed to. All of you who are upset about
'that doesn't make sense' are trying to play a different game by GW rules.

I suggest to those who don't like the 'that isn't realistic' part of any GW
game (Epic here) should go check out Dirtside II from GZG. That is a
little more of the realistic future mini game you are looking for. Just
use your Epic Figs and you will do just fine (there are rules for unit/mini
construction so you won't have any problem).

If the Super Hero in WH40K really bothers you then try Star Grunt II (I
think it is II anyhow) also by GZG.

The point is, Epic (or any GW game for that matter) is not trying to show
realistic future combat. It is showing how combat works in the fictional
GW universe (much like a comic book roleplaying game perhaps shows how
people live in a comic book universe). And with that in mind it does a
pretty good job.

Just a thought.

Chad (was gone, now I'm back)
Received on Thu Mar 05 1998 - 14:00:38 UTC