Re: [Epic] Orders....

From: sauron1 <sauron1_at_...>
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 1997 03:52:35 -0700

Matthew J. Silvernail wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Jul 1997, Emmanuel BLONDIAUX wrote:
>
> > EPIC/40K don't use the SM/TL order phase. It's a pity...
> > I think it 's really a good idea that you don't know what your opponent
> > want to do...
> > Until the reveal order phase.....
>
> Well, the place orders/check initiative/reveal orders system of SM/TL
> was good for simulating the confusion of battle... the problem was
> that if you lost initiative for the turn, you could end up having your
> tactics really messed up. Since you placed your orders before you knew
> if you were moving first or second, your orders could often end up
> defeating tactics, which in my opinion placed too much importance on
> that single die roll for initiative.
> The E40K system lets you see when you're going to move before you
> have to commit to a set of orders, which slightly lowers the penalty
> for losing initiative. There are good and bad points to both systems;
> I myself really don't like it when completely random factors like an
> initiative roll interfere too much with tactics - others feel differently.
>
> -- Matt Silvernail

Sauron1 writes;Again a house rule we used for Epic2nd was to role for
initiative first then layout orders,it worked but inhibbitted the chaos
of real conflict.We also often played games where we diced for the
availability of uor selectted support units as that is a real factor in
any period of warfare.Unless we are playing a researched historical
scenario refight,this rolling for the arival or availability of support
units is a common habit at my wargame club. sauron1
Received on Sun Jul 06 1997 - 10:52:35 UTC