Re: [Epic] Titan Legion rules vs. Epic 40k

From: DeconSolo <DeconSolo_at_...>
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 16:39:33 EDT

Ok, I'll voice my two cent rant.....
1) My group never had a problem maneuvering, or flanking, or what not. We
always did it, because the other guy was going to. This is probably a
conceptual thing on our part. We never looked at playing SM/TL as a "game,"
but rather (being the old RPGers we are), as the Generals/Warbosses/Hive
Tyrants in the battle. Thus we never overly concerned ourselves with the
cheeze factors of the rules. that, and we usually field fluffy armies, with
sense.
2) If you don't like fluff in the rules what have you got? A generic sci-fi
6mm Minis game...oh wait, that's what E40K is right? (Gratuitous slam) So
what if a fluffy army isn't practical or exciting? It reflects the universe
the game is set in, an NOT real world analogies.
3) The problem with GW games in general (especially 40K, WFB, and even E40K)
is to tweek an army to "perfection" so that after two or three battles, nobody
wants to play anymore. "What's the point? You're just gonna win again..."
This means people are using the rules to create armies that have advantages,
legal under the rules, that just would never happen in the game's universe.
This is not what the intent of the games was, nor should it be, unless GW
drops ALL the fluff from ALL their games.
4) Fluff is important. It grounds the individual troop types in the universe
in which they "exist." And yes if something is in direct opposition to the
fluff, I say go with the fluff, cuz that's what the intent was. E40K has
removed far too much, and in true GW fashion has altered the fluff, making it
"kinder and gentler," to fit it's new universe, and done so badly IMO. Much
of what attracted me to WH40K and SM/TL is going, bit by bit.

Guess the people I've played with over the years are just abnormal
wierdos......Well yeah......
Received on Wed May 06 1998 - 20:39:33 UTC