Armageddon Rules Forum

[CyberShadow]

I would like to compile views from a number of people about the rules system currently available for Epic Armageddon. So, I will do it in two stages. Firstly, I want to see what rules people like or dislike, and what alternatives there are, then I will run polls to vote on which rules system is prefered. I will post this in a number of places: here, www.epic40k.com, the epic email list, Portent and Dakka. If you have a site with a forum, then let me know where it is and I will add it there too.

So, please post here and let me know:
What specific rule you are talking about
Whether you like it or not
What you like/dislike about it
If you dislike it, what you would do/change with it

I am assuming that the general idea works well, so saying that you like the feel is not as helpful as saying that the assault rule is good because it is quick and allows you to behave as a commander. Try to keep comments specific to a certain rule. In the end, I will compile the results and send them off.

Thanx.

[Shadow_Hunter]

Well I dont like the way the fall back move for a broken detatchment can be made in any direction. I would prefer it to be at least away from the enemy if you are to move at all. Obviously if you need to move past the enemy to get away from them (if you were surrounded) then it should be allowed.

I also dont like transports not being able to carry other formations. I understand transports that are allocated to a formation consisting of troops also not being able to. But a formation of pure transports should be able to pick up a formation of purely troops.

That all I can think of at the moment.

[Shadow_Hunter]

I like the rule for pinning units (when I remember it). though it needs to be clarified whether transported troops can be allocated as the units that are pinned. As this allows the vehicles to carry on firing, despite no other units currently on the field of play.

I'm still unsure with the rolling two D6 to see who wins combat (assault) In my games I ve had formations roll terrible and lose combat despite causing more wounds. I know you have a modifier for causing kills, I'm just not sure its enough.

Also have you noticed the writing for rolling a double 6?

Cant remember exactly but its something like this:-
If you destroy the enemy formation totally, you can make a sweeping advance..blah..blah..this can be used to charge the formation you defeated in combat.

But aren't they dead already to allow you to sweeping advance?

[CyberShadow]

The whole double-dice is something that I dont like in EpicA. As for sweeping advances, does the ENTIRE detachment have to be destroyed? I thought that you could win by killing more stands, although some may be alive. A sweeping advance then lets you bring in units which were out of the battle last turn, or which have destroyed their opponent in the previous close combat. Is that right?

[Shadow_Hunter]

I'm sure it says something along the lines of- if you win combat, and destroy the opposing formation...

I'll check and post the exact words tomorrow.

[Shadow_Hunter]

Here's the latest reply from Jervis to a couple of questions if you want them.

> From the games I've had I was wondering that if a formation of say termies
> in land raiders recieves blast markers, is it possible to allocate them to
> the transported troops. This would pin those, leaving the vehicles to
> fire (seems harsh).
>
Hmmm, good question. We've always played that transported units cannot
shoot, so cannot be pinned, but the rules don't state this specifically.
>
> Also a formation of Termies in land raiders is fired upon. The formation
> has to fire all its AT weapons, since thats the only target at first. if
> any are destroyed, can any AP weapons that didn't get to fire attack the
> now availble termies?
>
Another good question. The answer is yes, they can shoot.
>
> Any reports from my games are usually available at www.Epic40k.co.uk where
> hopefully the Eldar list will be put up soon.
>
I'll look forward to seeing the Eldar list...

Jervis

*********
I didn't think they'd actually be bothered by anything I had done for Eldar. I think I'll send it in, even if its laughed at.

[CyberShadow]

Shadow_Hunter said:

>
> Any reports from my games are usually available at www.Epic40k.co.uk where
> hopefully the Eldar list will be put up soon.
>
I'll look forward to seeing the Eldar list...

Jervis

*********
I didn't think they'd actually be bothered by anything I had done for Eldar. I think I'll send it in, even if its laughed at.

Great, thanks for the mention. I had better out up your Eldar list as soon as I can then!

[stormking]

i've played a few games of epica and find the system seems to work quite well, although i think a couple of things need teaks,

i must admit not being completely happy with the zones of control, perhaps its me, but i've had units unable to move due to not being able to enter a zone and not wanting to engage in an assault with that unit, this makes me wonder how an ambush could be set up/sprung since the enemy wouldn't be able to enter the 'kill zone'

[CyberShadow]

Well, leaving aside the problem of surprising a player who can see the whole board and you moving your troops, there are three scenarios for an ambush:

You dont want to attack - you have to get out.
You want to shoot - you can do this at any range under the maximum range
You want to assault - charge

I would say that not being able to move due to the zones of control is fairly realistic, as troops would not want to simply stroll past the enemy without engaging.

I need to check the rules, but are you able to engage in assault not close combating, only for a fire fight?

[stormking]

thanks, cybershadow,
you can engage in just a firefight if the enemy don't use their counter charge move to get into close combat,
i was just wondering about ambushes since a unit may allow the enemy to get slightly past them before closing a trap, i've seen footage from normandy where german troops are on one side of a hedge as allied troops and tanks are using the road

[CyberShadow]

I guess in this case, you would need to set up the ambush on a larger scale, with at least two of your formations. Then you have the reason for the crossfire rule, making this version of the game actually better for this type of thing.

[stormking]

i like the idea of the crossfire rule but only if all formations involved in the crossfire shoot, if the enemy are wiped out then the remaining formations can not switch target since it is assumed their fire was part of that which destroyed the enemy, but in the epica faqs it says that both formations do not need to fire at the enemy, yet the firer will get the crossfire bonus, but if only one unit fires then there is no crossfire

[bedmat]

Counter charge range is 10 for 30 or more movement units and 5 for 25 or less movement units.

so if you are 11 cm away you can make a firefight assault without entering close combat.
Best regards
Remember that counter charge is straight to assaulting units

[DustandPolos]

I just got theis edition of the game, so I don't have a clue about the next one. Where can I find the rules for Epic Armaggedon?

[Blacksnotling]

The rules are available from the GW website under the Epic 40000 section. I you have to give feedback from the test rules there before the give you access. The Full instructions should be on the site somewhere