Re: [Epic] Battle report and comments (LONG)

From: Erik Rutins <snowdo1_at_...>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 16:18:41 -0400

> against Orks (Elias), 2500 points per side. Then Elias couldn't get
> car, and Erik looked at the map and saw how far it was going to be, so
> had 1250 (or so) points of Eldar and a nice terrain setup and nobody
> shoot. (Don't worry guys; I'll concede you both had legitimate

Oops. :-) Driving 8 hours there and back followed by another 4 hours
the next morning was enough to make this marine fail his leadership
test, even with a reroll!

> :) (By the way Erik, Duran on the list goes to school in Amherst, and
> should be lots closer to you. We've not met, but might try something
> next fall.)

Sounds good!

> So my wife volunteered, and I gave her 1250 (or so) points of Space
> Marines. We played the Escalating Engagement.

Glad you got a chance to shoot something!

Nice battle report.

> 1) A March move means you can't take advantage of cover. What about
> LOS? If most of a detachment's move was in view, and they end up out
> LOS, they're safer than if they could use cover. What about range? I
> realize that this is an issue that any game that is sampling the
> at certain times will have.

LOS is LOS and if you end out of LOS you can't be shot at (except by
artillery and planes). What about range?

> 2) I think the most blast markers any detachment had after removing
> in the rally phase was 2. This with tons of blast markers laid down,
... snip ...
> faced a large number, so I'm sorta reacting against how I saw the game
> was playing in. But I've seen the problem on both sides.

Weren't you proposing removing _more_ blast markers a few months ago?
In any case, I find that you have to play at least 2,000 points for the
system to even out luck and bizarre dice rolling. I've often thought
that a simple solution for blast markers would be to allow the counter
attack/firefight cards to give you a blast marker "reroll" instead. In
larger battles, I find it does even out and the system works well.

> (the night spinners weren't all that impressive, except occasionally),
> but if we had more of 'em I could see that being an issue. So I'd
> with a maximum morale penalty equal to the morale value. Since this
> maximum over the game, not maximum per turn, I think it only makes

Nightspinners can be very impressive, but YMMV. The maximum morale
penalty needs some playtesting, but IMHO it has merit. I would still
deduct morale when the detachment is halved. A random thought: Perhaps
morale loss due to blast markers should instead be the difference
between your remaining blast markers and your enemy's? i.e. at the end
of the Rally phase you have 10 BMs left. Your enemy has 8BMs left.
Therefore you lose 2 morale... thoughts?

> 3) It is frustrating to have grav-tank Engines o' Vaul, and not be
> to maneuver the darn things. I want to go backwards, and just can't
> it.

Make a house rule - I agree that it's strange War Engines can't back up,
especially grav tanks and things with legs. However, EOVs are still
darned maneuverable for war engines and with the Scorpions' 360 degree
fire field it's not too tough to keep them safe and sound.

> cm towards the place the marines were, or should they turn around and
> move at least 5 back the way they came? The rules directly
> would say the latter, but I think that isn't really the intent. This
> a special case. I ended up moving them 5 towards where they were
> intending to assault, as if they saw that the marines were done, but
> took a bit more to stop, anyway. They didn't have time to turn around
> and go towards the troops behind them.

I think the intent of the rule is to move no further away from whatever
enemies are around you when you're making your move. I don't think they
intended you to select a target at the beginning of your movement phase
and barrel on no matter what. You are allowed to adjust to battlefield
events and change your target after shooting phase results. I do it
regularly, both because of matters beyond my control and as a
feint/bluff method.

Regards,

- Erik
Received on Tue Apr 28 1998 - 20:18:41 UTC