|
Post by CyberShadow on Aug 29, 2002 6:56:35 GMT -5
I have some questions, if you could help me Cybershadow. If a formation receives blast markers on a formation with troops in vehicles, can you choose to pin the transported troops, so that the vehicles can still fire. I am not 100% sure, but I would guess that you cant pin the transported units. It might be worth emailing to Jervis to let him know that the hole in the rules is there though. The firing phase has a number of sections. You fire all the AP weapons (including weapons which can affect infantry and vehicles but which chose to target at the infantry). Work out casualties, etc. Then do the same with the AT weapons, and then the MW weapons. But, I am fairly sure that all weapons must be targetted at the same formation. So targetting a formation with only vehicles means that your AP shots are wasted. Does that answer the question?
|
|
|
Post by Shadow_Hunter on Aug 29, 2002 7:02:38 GMT -5
Aye that helps. One thing was that the termies were inside the land raiders, so I shot all my AT weapons from the unit, with the intention of shooting the AP weapons at any termies that appeared. (they died in the blast any in the end) but wondered if that was wrong.
I may email fanatic these questions as you suggested.
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 9, 2002 18:17:02 GMT -5
Is it me or EpicA is becoming much more similar to Space Marine
Forget the Firepower value, now units have to roll independently during fire-fight and assault like in the old times...
Personnally, I don't exactly like that as it tend to significantly slow down the game
My suggestion: 1) Keep the individual rolls for long-range shooting 2) Bring back firepower table for fire-fight and Assault
|
|
|
Post by Shadow_Hunter on Sept 10, 2002 3:33:40 GMT -5
Greetings Scipio. Welcome to the boards.
I never played Space marine, so cant really comment on that. I'm sure Cybershadow can though.
I asked Jervis those questions above.
1- He said that they've played, if a unit cant shoot (being transported) then it cant be pinned. But he did say that the rules dont say it so will alter something.
2- He said you can fire the AT first, and then any targets that appear (troops) can ten be targetted by your AP fire.
|
|
|
Post by CyberShadow on Sept 10, 2002 3:59:13 GMT -5
I would not say that Epic is becoming similar to the original Space Marine, but it is swinging back towards a more detailed game - which is what the players were all crying out for a year ago. As long as we dont get those damn order counters, I will be fine.
I like the idea of firepower tables for firefights. However, I dont think that it would make a lot of difference, since you are now just totaling the number of dice needing, say a 5+, and rolling them together. Additionally, mixing two methods for similar aspects of a game is generally a bad idea.
I do like the direction, very much. I agree that it will slow things down a little, but I want a game that I can sit and plan for, where the details matter. If it takes all day then OK, an afternoon is perfect for me.
It is interesting that AT fire can also be done before AP fire. That will have implications elsewhere in the game, as the rules imply that AP is done first, then AT.
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 7:23:19 GMT -5
I'll try to come up with alternative Fire-fight rules and I'll post them here
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:26:55 GMT -5
I will e-mail a version to Cybershadow to get his comments and see if he wants to post them in a separate thread. I ha ve trouble with tables
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:39:03 GMT -5
Constructive criticism A new edition of Epic? Huuuurrrrrahh!!!. I always have been an avid fan of Epic and you can only imagine my joy when I’ll learned that Jervis was working on a new edition of my favourite game.
With Epic Armageddon, Jervis wants to solve what was perceived by many including myself as the biggest drawback of Epic40K, namely its too high level of abstraction. Though the current edition was very well suited to play massive battles, it had lost the feel and touch that made you identify yourself with your troops. In short, I want to know that it is the blue landraider that destroyed the ork boss battlewagon, not the yellow one...And I must say that Jervis has done a great work to achieve this goal.
I have downloaded the rules, read them and played a couple of games and I must say that I’ve liked what I’ve seen. The games mechanics flow well but I believe there is still some room for improvement.
Before continuing, let’s step back a little and look at the second edition of Epic (Epic Space Marine for the fans). What a great game it was but as anyone who has ever played a game above 3,500 pts will tell you, what a pain it was to run... Space Marine suffered from too much detail, too many dice rolls, too many modifiers to remember, to many counters to place and too many special rules which were often contradictory. This resulted in a painfully slow and overtly complicated gameplay.
If there is an aspect of the current Epic Armageddon that shares too many of those bad traits with the old Space Marine edition, it’s clearly the Assault rules. Many players have already criticised them but let me list what I don’t like about them
1. Do you hear this sound? It’s not the Niagara Falls, it’s just the sound of my fifty odd dice I am rolling to solve the close-combat. Way too many dices.
2. So in order to solves problem #1, the latest edition of the rules (8.4) dropped the firpower concept and replaced it with a good old to hit roll. Now the problem is that a tank as mighty as a Leman Russ Demolisher or Hellhound or a damaged Baneblade can only kill one puny stand of infantry per turn!!! Have you ever met a Leman Russ in a game of W40K (which is represented in Epic Armageddon by an Assault)? Tanks are mighty opponents that can dish out much more severe punishment at close range than they are given credit for under the current rules. By the way, still too many dices even with rules 8.4.
3. Why move my troops and assault? I am far better off staying away and firing from long range. Especially true with tanks. Take a Predator Destructor for example. This tank has 3 AP5 shot at long range instead of 1 AP4 in firefight. My prediction: you will see combined formations (tanks and infantry) disappear which is sad because one of the good points of Epic 40k was that it rewarded players who built well rounded formations. The game will become much more static and way too much “shooty” (Like Space Marine). Better be on overwatch than on the move or assaulting.
4. Allocating hits. It’s always a pain when you have to measure distances in a cramped assault. You always end up into discussions about which unit is the nearest. It also slow down the game terribly.
5. 4+ save for basic guardsman in cover? I can understand that for shooting but what about assaulting? Your average guardsman is as tough as a battle hardened SM once it gets behind a wall. Shouldn’t one of the reason players want to assault is to dislodge an enemy formation?
6. What about this close-combat resolution chart? I can kill way much more opponents and still loose the fight because of a bad roll of a dice. Furthermore, a handful of men can drive away a massive force too often
To summarise, I still think the Assault rules could be improved and that’s exactly what I propose to do. So ladies and gentlemen, here I come....
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:41:04 GMT -5
1.12 NEW ASSAULTS Designer’s note: Summary of my objectives 1. Less dices, faster gameplay 2. Improve tanks’ effectiveness during assaults; Differentiate better between anti-armour tanks (Leman Russ Vanquisher) and anti-personel tanks (Leman Russ Demolisher) 3. Reward players who take the risk of assaulting instead of sitting back and shooting 4. Reward players who build a combined force. Concept of infantry supporting tanks
A formation taking a charge action is allowed to make one move, and then fights an assault against the enemy. Make the move normally, as described in the movement rules above. Note that you don’t have to move towards the enemy if you don’t want to. Once the move is complete the formation will fight an assault against any and all enemy formations that have units within 15cm of a unit from the formation taking the charge action.
It’s important to note here that ALL enemy formations that have a unit within 15cm of a unit from the charging formation are engaged in the assault. There is no need for any units to get into base-to-base contact with the enemy, and no need for a target for the assault to be nominated. Also note that other friendly formations within 15cms of the enemy are NOT involved in the assault. Thus the assault will be fought by the charging formation on one side, and all enemy formations within 15cms of it on the other.
1.12.1 Moving Into Contact
Units from a charging formation are allowed to move into base contact with an enemy unit as part of the move they make before the assault is fought. This is the only time a unit may enter an enemy zone of control. See the rules for zones of control above. Moving into base contact allows the unit to fight with its close combat value rather than its firefight value, as described below. A maximum of two units may move into base contact with each defender. Remember that a charging unit that enters a zone of control must move into base contact with the nearest enemy whose zone of control has been entered. Once a unit has been contacted it losses its zone of control for the rest of the assault, allowing other units to move past it. Important: Formations that are charging are only allowed to make a single move, and this move is made before the assault is fought. Also note that it is not required to move into base contact with any enemy formations in order to assault them- as long as you get within 15cms then they will be ‘engaged’ as described above.
1.12.2 Counter Charges
An assault represents a brutal short-range battle involving movement, shooting and close combat. Although the assaulting formation will have initiated the combat, any defending formations will have time to react to the enemy assault and make limited moves of their own. To represent this, defending units belonging to a formation involved in the assault are allowed to make a special move called a counter charge. Defending formations are involved in the assault if they have at least one unit within 15cms of a unit from the formation that is taking the charge action.
Defending units with a speed of 30cm or more may make a counter charge move of 10cms. Units with a speed of 25cm or less may make a counter charge move of 5cms
Counter charge moves happen after the charging formation has finished moving and any overwatch shots have been taken, but before the combat is resolved. All the normal movement rules apply, and defending formations must still be in a legal formation after the counter charge moves have been made (i.e. all units must be within 5cm of another unit from their formation).
IMPORTANT: A unit must use their counter charge move to move directly towards the closest enemy unit. It may move into base contact if close enough, and as long as the enemy is not already in contact with two defending units. Units can choose not to counter charge if they wish, but if they do move they must head towards the nearest enemy.
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:42:20 GMT -5
[1.12.3 Assault Procedure
The following procedure is used to resolve an assault. 1. Both side add-up their firepower. 2. Combat roll 3. Both side consult the firepower chart and determine the number of hits 4. Apply hits and determine casualties 5. Declare winner, apply result and blast marker
Adding up firepower Each player add the total combined close-combat or firefight values of all his units involved in the current assault, Only units within 15cm of an enemy may contribute to the total combined value. Units in hand-to-hand (base in contact) add their close-combat value while units not in hand-to-hand but within 15cm of an enemy add their firefight value. Units from different formation may contribute to the same assault.
Designer’s note: Keep the to hit roll for individual weapons for long range shooting (i.e. move or overwatch orders) but bring back the firepower concept for close range fight. A Demolisher can now have a firefight value of 6 and “contribute” much more to a firefight than it’s single 3+ to hit roll under the 8.4 rules. You can better differentiate between anti-armour vs anti-personnel tanks (A Demolisher firefight value of 6 vs a normal Russ firefight value of 4)
Combat roll In order to decide how well each player’s troop fought, each player rolls 2D6, and then adds any modifiers that apply from the chart below to the single D6 that rolled highest. Note that you don’t add your dice rolls together, but use the single dice with the highest score.
Whoever side has the higher score after any modifiers have been added is assumed to have fought better than his opponent on an individual basis and is declared to have taken the “Advantage”<br> Assault modifiers (Cumulative) You have more troop than your opponent.............+1 You have less Blast marker than your opponent.....+1 One of the opposing formation is broken ................+1 You have more Firepower than your opponent........+1 You have at least two times your opponent’s firepower ..........+1 You have at least three times your opponent’s firepower...........+1 You have at least four times your opponent’s firepower............+1
Example: My 24 Firepower IG detachment (12 stands, 2 Demolisher; 3 blast markers) gets to assault my opponent 10 Firepower SM detachment (6 stands, 1 blast marker)
My assault modifier is +3 +1 for more troop +1 for having more firepower +1 for having at least twice the firepower
My opponent assault modifier is +1 +1 for having less blast markers
I roll the two dice and come up with 2,3 while my opponent come up with 1,4
My final combat roll is 6 (3+3) vs 5 (4+1). I have therefore the “Advantage”<br> Designer’s note: This radically limits the number of dice you have to roll to solve a combat leading to a quick and seamless gameplay
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:43:54 GMT -5
Designer’s note: This radically limits the number of dice you have to roll to solve a combat leading to a quick and seamless gameplayDetermining the number of hits Calculate the difference between each player’s combat roll and consult the table bellow to see which column should each player use on the firepower chart Combat roll difference | Player with Advantage use column | Opponent use column | 0-2 | C | C | 3-4 | C | B | 5-6 | D | B | 7-8 | D | A | 9+ | E | A |
To determine the number of hits inflicted on the enemy, each player consult the firepower chart below Firepower /A/B/C/D/E 1...1 1 1 1 1 2...1 1 1 1 1 3...1 1 1 1 2 4...1 1 1 2 2 5...1 1 2 2 2 6...1 1 2 2 3 7...1 2 2 3 3 8...1 2 2 3 3 9...2 2 3 3 4 10..2 2 3 4 4 11..2 2 3 4 5 12..2 2 3 4 5 13..2 3 4 5 5 14..2 3 4 5 6 15..2 3 4 5 6 16..2 3 4 6 6 17..3 3 5 6 7 18..3 3 5 6 7 19..3 4 5 7 8 20..3 4 5 7 8 21..3 4 6 7 8 22..3 4 6 8 9 23..3 4 6 8 9 24..3 4 6 8 9 25..4 5 7 9 10 Designer’s note: Firepower chart for illustrative purposes only. It still needs some tweaking and number crunching.Example continued from before: I have won the combat roll by 1 (6-5). This mean that both me and my opponent will be using column C from the firepower chart. I might have had the upper hand but only marginally With my firepower of 24, I’ll inflict 6 hits while my opponent will return the kindness by inflicting 3 hits on my troops
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 10, 2002 15:48:27 GMT -5
Applying hits and determining casualties Each player allocates the hits inflicted on their formation as they choose against units that are within 15cm of the enemy. Hits must be allocated in accordance with the following priority rules.
Priority rule 1: Apply hits to units in hand to hand (base in contact) first and then to units that are 15 cm away from the enemy
Priority rule 2: Apply hits first to infantry stands then light vehicles then armored vehicles and then to war machines
Priority rule 3: Apply hits first to units that are not in cover
Priority rule 1 has precedence of priority rule 2, which in turn has precedence over priority rule 3
Designer’s note: Priority rule 1: Made to avoid having to physically measure which is the nearest unit. It’s easy to see which units are in hand-to-hand. The player then use priority rules 2 and 3 to decide which further away units get hit. This rule also avoids some strange formation where players organise their stands so as to maximise the effectiveness of troops with good saves and protect more vulnerable troops. Priority rule 2: Introduce the concept of infantry supporting tanks. A tank company supported by infantry will survive much longer than a pure tank company. Inexpensive infantry stands can be used to soak-up casualties.
You may not allocate a second hit to a unit until one hit has been allocated to every potential target, or allocate a third hit until all targets have been allocated two hits, etc. Once all hits have been allocated make saving throws as you would for shooting attacks. Infantry stand in cover may benefit from their cover save only if they are not in hand-to-hand (base in contact) with an enemy. If the unit is in hand-to-hand, it may only use its normal save.
Designer’s note: This rewards players who assault. Infantry stands in cover are hard to dislodge by shooting alone (4+ cover save). They best way to get rid of them is therefore to storm their position and physically assault them. This should lead to a game where players actually attack instead of the old shooting match under Space Marine edition.
Declaring the winner, applying hits and blast markers After both players have removed casualties, the outcome of the combat must be decided. The player that suffered the least casualty is declared the winner.
All formations on the losing side are broken, and all formations on the winning side receive a number of Blast markers equal to the number of units that were killed by the enemy. As already noted, the loser of the combat is broken and must make an immediate withdrawal move. Broken formations must retreat as explained in the rules for broken formations later on. If the loser was already broken then they are routed instead, and all units in the formation are removed from play as casualties.
Important Note: Kills inflicted in an assault do not count for placing blast markers or for breaking the formation until AFTER the result of the combat has been worked out. If the winner of the combat was already broken at the start of the combat, they do not receive any additional blast markers. Sometimes this will mean that the winner of an assault will receive enough blast markers to break them also (i.e. they will end up with more than one per unit in the formation). In this case the winning formation is broken, but does not have to make a withdrawal move.
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 11, 2002 13:07:02 GMT -5
Firepower | A | B | C | D | E | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 13 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 14 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 16 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 19 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 20 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 21 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 22 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 23 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 24 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 25 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 10 |
|
|
|
Post by CyberShadow on Sept 13, 2002 3:45:40 GMT -5
Wow. I got your rules, scipio. I am glad that you posted them here because I am a bit busy over the weekend and wont get a chance to look at them until next week. They look pretty detailed, well done. In the meantime, feedback from other people here? Anyone, played these yet?
|
|
|
Post by scipio on Sept 13, 2002 9:06:48 GMT -5
Tell me how those rules work and if they speed up the game.
For units firepower values, just use the epic40k stats
I am especially interested in feedback on the firepower chart
|
|