Re: [Epic] Full Game -Reply

From: Andy Skinner <askinner_at_...>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 10:53:47 -0500

Keith Shuler wrote:
>
> What's the problem with Epic 40,000? I just joined the list today
> (7/16/97). Looks pretty interesting to me, but I would like your comments.
> That is unless I'm opening a can of worms that all of you have gone
> through already. I think Space Marine battles on a large scale would be
> interesting. Granted they would not be as detailed in the weapons
> choices, etc., but that wouldn't be that bad. If it got as detailed as the
> man-to-man stuff in WH40K, it would end up looking like the Advanced
> Squad Leader section of my gaming self and I would have that same
[snip 8< ]

Keith, I think the comparison is more between Space Marine 2nd edition
and Epic 40K, rather than Epic 40K vs WH40K. Not all of us on this
list have played WH40K (I haven't). There are some things from 2nd
edition that don't feel quite the same way, with some troops missing,
not being able to pick targets for each shot, different shots on
vehicles being lumped into generic FP, etc. There are mixed views
on many aspects of the game on this list. I do get the impression
that many people grew to really like E40K, even to their surprise.
Many didn't like it at first, or didn't expect to. I'm still in
the reluctant phase myself, having played two battles. I find that
there are a couple of places that don't feel right to me (Close
Assaults, Firefights, Snap Fire, barrage weapons not applying their
FP to the units the barrage covered, etc). But I do think the games
have been going faster than they used to in 2nd edition for me, and
that is an important point for me.

andy
askinner_at_...
Received on Wed Jul 16 1997 - 15:53:47 UTC