Re: [Epic] Hello (E40K???)

From: David Lado <lado_at_...>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 11:00:58 -0400 (EDT)

>> >For example; LOS was
>> >always a big issue in the old Epic... Now, you don't even need it
>(in
>> >assaults and FF). Is Epic 40K really a better game simply because it
>> >sweeps the problems of somplexity under the rug and therefore makes
>> >the game less stimulating?
>>
>> I definetely think so.
>
>The character of the game came from its complexities. Some of us
>actually liked playing an intellectually stimulating game.

Obviously we are operating under different definitions of
"intellectually stimulating". I like trying to out-think my
opponent and beat him using a better plan. I consider trying to
determine if a unit in a building can see enough of the wave-
serpent to shoot it "intellectually mind-numbing". I don't see
the connection between complexity and depth of play. Diplomacy
is a very simple game (two kinds of units, 3 different kinds of
playing spaces, three possible moves, thats it), and yet it has
tremendous depth of play and replay value and is a very
intellectually challanging game.

>> One of the things I noticed about the orks (it may be true of
>>e40k too, but I don't know) is that all their unit variation did
>>not really translate into a variety of tactical options. That
>>is, I could play around with the units I put in my army,
>>subsitituting this clan for that, or these vehicles for those,
>>but it didn't really change the way I played my army.
>
>Isn't the idea of having several "unique" armies so that each only has
>limited tactical options? ie. IG are MEANT to simply sit back and
>shoot; I have not seen too many Tyranid armies doing that. In fact,
>not many tyranid armies do much more than simply run at their
>opponent. This I believe is the challenge to playing any particular
>army; the idea is to master the (few) strategies available to that
>army. If each army could have a huge set of viable tactics, there
>would be no point in having different armies at all.

But that doesn't justify adding complexity and unit density. For
example, if the IG are meant to simply sit back and shoot, why
do they need 4 different kinds of artillery units, when they are
are all basically doing the same thing? Why do the orks need 6
different types of light vehicles when they are effectively
identical? Why does each army need slightly rearranged stats on
their heavy weapons units when they are deployed and function in
the same way?

What I like about e40k is that it stripped away the individual
detail of the units (the special rules that caused 90% of the
rules questions), and got down to the fundamental question of
"what does the unit do on the board?". Back to the example
of with the orks, The orks have a dizzying array of light
vehicles: Gobsmashas, wartracks, buggies, bikes, scrochers, and
bowelburnas, each with slightly different stats, but genrally
speaking they traded CAF for firepower or cost. What I
learned from experience is that the only only real choice I
made was to put a Kult of speed in my army and if so, how big.
People can argue till their blue in face which of the 6 is a
"better value" but I know from experience that it makes no
difference at all in the outcome of the game which units you
take. The only thing that matters is how the Kult of speed
overall is used.

SM/TL was/is full of rules that can add flavor but don't really
help the game and can often cause problems. For example, is
it really _necessary_ that the doomweaver use a different template?
Does it really make the game better that the ordinatus shield is
different from a kustorm deflector shied and a knight shield?

Frex, why the special rules on getting out from under doomweaver
templates? Why not just say the doomweaver fire a 5pt barrage
template with a -6 save modifier or something like that. Instead
they created a whole battery of special rules that caused no
end of arguements

"Well, you're automatically destroyed unless you have a 1+ save,
unless you're are also immobolized, but being hit by a
waveserpent doesn't count, unless the waveserpent pushes you
into the webs after their down, unless it's tuesday or if
it's raining outside".

To quote the Tick "Egad! What's the point!"

If your idea of intellectually stimulating is sorting through
pointless details and citing rules, then there is a future for
you in law school ;). I can see why people like this sort of
thing, and why they miss it when it's gone, but for me these
units made the game _less_ enjoyable rather than more because
of the inevitable problems that arose, even among well
intentioned and honerable players.

David
Received on Wed Jul 02 1997 - 15:00:58 UTC