[Epic] LOUD Q&A ANNOUNCEMENT!! PLEASE READ!!!!

From: A. Allen McCarley <allen_at_...>
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 16:33:20 -0500

.....and sorry for the shouting.

Jervis' answers in the last Q&A were completely consistent. I screwed
up the answer when I tried to clarify. All the comments in the square
brackets are mine. Keeping my words inside square brackets while keeping
JJ's and AC's words *out* of square brackets is a convention I have used
in all the Q&A traffic. This would have been much more clear if I had
remembered to type "Editor's Comment" in the brackets as well, as I have
always done in the past.

My apologies for the errors, and even more apologies to Jervis if he's
reading.

Please find below the Q&A the way it should have appeared and, indeed the
way I thought it was going to appear, the first time.

Still doesn't make Farseers any less expensive.....



----------------------------------------------------------------
****** Super Duper Q&A w/ Editor's Errors Removed **************
----------------------------------------------------------------

> >1) If a detachment consists of 3 units, is morale lost when one
> >unit has been destroyed, or two units? The examples in the book show
> >that half strength is calculated by rounding up, but this wasn't true
> >in the old Epic.
> a) A 3 unit detachment loses morale when one unit has been destroyed
> b) A 3 unit detachment loses morale when two units have been destroyed
>
> P: Judging by the examples in the rules, we decided to round odd numbers
> down for Studio battles, but to be honest I can't really remember, and I'm
> not sure whether all the different play-testers did it this way (for
> example, Andy and myself might have decided to round down, while Robin and
> Paul may have decided to round up in the games they played). In other
> words, you should feel free to round up or round down as you wish, but try
> and be consistent during the same game!

[Editor's Comment: The rules always seem to talk about losing morale when
  a unit has been reduced "to half stragnth or less," and thus I would
  suggest losing morale from a 3 unit detatchment after taking 2 casualties.]

> >2) May an army's strategy rating change in mid-game, or is it fixed for
> >the duration at the start of the game? For example, a marine force would
> >have a strategy rating of 5, but this decreases to 4 if they inclued any
> >Guard units or Titans in their army. Would the rating increase to 5 again
> >if all Guard units and Titans were destroyed in the midst of a game?
> > a) The strategy rating is fixed for the duration of the game,
> > regardless of casualties.
> > b) The strategy rating may change if casualties reduce a "mixed" force to
> > a "pure" force. (Change the rating at the beginning of the next
> > turn, or the beginning of the next phase?)
>
> P: This is another question I can't honestly remember coming up during
> plytesting. This makes me think that if it did ever occur (and I think it
> must have), then we imply didn't notice and kept on playing with the same
> strategy rating we'd been using since the start of the battle. However,
> players that prefer to come up with their own house rules for such
> situations should feel free to do so, as I can see no good reason why the
> strategy rating should *not* change from turn to turn depending on the
> composition of the army.
>
> >3) List members are still having trouble figuring out how to buy
> >commanders for their armies. For each of the forces below, please
> >indicate whether any and or all of the options are legal to purchase
> >as the detatchment's original commander.
>
> > Lots of people have asked me this question in lots of
> > different ways, but basically I think the issues come down to whether
> >you can purchase any unit as a commander for +25 for the marines, and do
> >the Eldar have to add 25 points to their Farseers if they want to use
> >them as HQ units or is this already figured in?
>
> P: I can understand the confusion, and it has to be said that the army book
> could have been clearer on this subject. The problem seem to have come
> about because late in playtesting we decided to allow any units to be HQs
> (so that players didn't *have* to field Captains, etc), and althoug the
> army lists were changed, not all of the examples were updated. This is one
> of the major problem with writing rules, because at the time of writing you
> don't have one rulebook, you have a whole bunch of computer files on
> several different computers. Making sure that every single file gets
> updated is a complete nightmare, and things like this always seem to slip
> through (though you should see the number of errors we *do* catch).
>
> But I digress (sp?); on to the specific questions:
>
> > Marine Detatchements:
> > a)Any marine unit at +25 points to the basic cost
> > b)Captain at 25 points
> > c)Captain at 25+25=50 points
> > d)Librarian at 35 points
> > e)Librarian at 235+25=65 points
>
> P: a) [Editor's Comment: Which includes c and e; my fault]
>
> > Eldar Detatchments
> > a)Any unit at +25 points
> > b)Farseer at 50 points
> > c)Farseer at 50+25=75 points
>
> P: a) - the Farseer should cost 75 points
>
> > Chaos Marine Detatchments
> > a) any unit at +25 to basic cost
> > b) Chaos Lord HQ at 25 points
> > c) Chaos Lord HQ at 25+25=50 points
> > d) Sorceror HQ at 35 points
> > e) Sorceror HQ at 35+25=60 points
>
> P: a) [Editor's Comment: which, again, includes c and e]
>
> Hope that helps!
>
> Jervis

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see, even the "again" in the last set of brackets now makes
much more sense. I think what happened is that I put another paragraph
between the questions and the point at which I said 'please pick any and
all.' Thus, Jervis might have felt that he was being asked to choose
only one of the options listed for each question. Besides, in both
cases choice a) really does include choices b) and c) !

---------------------------------------------------------------
Allen (The Q&A guy)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the EPIC and EPIC 40K Q&A Pages at:
     http://work1.utsi.edu:8000/~amccarle/default.html
If you have questions about EPIC 40K and can't find the answers
in the rule books, send them to:
                    allen_at_...
They will be passed on to Jervis Johnson and Andy Chambers.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thu May 01 1997 - 21:33:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:25 UTC