Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Episode 59 is truly Epic, both in length and content!

First up the D6G team welcomes back Ross Watson from Fantasy Flight Games. Ross brings us up to speed on the latest Warhammer 40,000 role playing game: Deathwatch. Now you can play Space Marines! How do the different chapters work? What new Chapter did FFG invent? What makes it different from Horus Heresy and Rogue Trader?

With all that talk of the Warhammer 40,000 universe, Raef, Craig, and Russ felt it was time to tackle Epic: Armageddon. Small in scale doesn't mean small in game play. We discuss the game in detail.

And be sure to catch Total Fan Girl this week as she interviews three pro-gamers from the "Fragdolls." What is it like to be a gamer on the pro vid-game circuit?
All that and our other not-too-horrible segments including:

- Rapid Fire
- The Hollywood Minute
- The News
- & More

Link to the episode: http://www.thed6generation.com/d6g_ep_59_deathwatch_interview_epic_armageddon_detailed_review_fragdolls_interview

Please let us know what you think!

Excellent episode guys. Ross delivers again and guarantees I'll be waiting in line for Deathwatch at Gen Con. The review of Epic Armageddon was great and makes me want to get back into it, which is huge considering I haven't played since 2nd ed. Epic.

Craig- I saw Airbender myself last night and I agree with everything you said. If I can make one suggestion, it would be to watch the cartoon series. Yes, I know, it's a cartoon, and a lot of adults can't get past the fact that they feel like they need to shut the drapes so none of their friends see them watching it. But, it is fantastic! (Besides, you're going to be a father very soon so there's your excuse)

Yes, it is geared towards tweens-teens so there is some slapstick and some awkward steps towards teen romance, but even the most lame moments in the cartoon (if there really are any) are like Shakespeare compared to M.Knight's steaming turd. The voice acting, direction, character development, story plotting and pacing are all excellent.

The action in the TV series is also phenomenal, which is another problem I had with the movie last night. In the cartoon, bending is instantaneous. Zuko punches his fist- He shoots fire. Katara swoops her arms- she whips the water around like she's touching it. In the movie, it was very disjointed. It seemed like the characters needed to whip into this 10 second long kata form just to throw a fireball. You'd have a sword stuck in you before you ever got off a shot.

But of all the things that bothered me, and it was seemingly such a small thing, is that two of the main characters names are purposefully mispronounced. Aang should be like boomerang with a long A. Sokka is with a short o, like Sock-a. It seems like such a niggling point, but to me it says that he cared so little for the source material that he felt he could mess with prime details like that.

Everthing else was decent though. I agree that the Fire Nation ships were one of the best things about the movie. I so want that fleet for Uncharted Seas! The costuming and sets (CG and otherwise) were also all very good. So the really sad part here is; it could have been so much more. Honestly, I'm surprised that the creators of the cartoon series would have relinquished so much control, but as part of Nickelodeon & Universal, I'm guessing it was almost totally taken out of their hands and delivered unto Shymalanadingdong.

Ahh well. Perhaps, if we're lucky, the series will get a reboot with a more competent director in a few years.

And finally, I'm looking forward to seeing you guys at Gen Con this year, except for Craig of course. Don't worry Craig, the minute you're holding that sweet little bundle and he or she opens their little eyes and stares back at you, you'll be thinking, "Gen Con? What's that?" That is, until you're woken up for the third time at night for yet another diaper change and feeding, and then you'll be thinking, "Damn! I could at least be not getting sleep at Gen Con right now!"

Jeff

Just thought I'd post this here since I know you guys are big fans of Small World (sorry to be off-topic from the episode at hand, I haven't listened to it yet).

The ipad version of the game just went 1.0 and you can now play against the computer...goodbye productivity at work for me!

Another great episode, Epic is one of those games I have always been interested in but have shied away from because I really don't want to start another scale (and also due to some nightmarish micro-armour games from a decade or so ago)

I sympathize with Raef, I got my Flames of War Vietnam stuff at Christmastime and immediately assembled the helicopters and painted one platoon of Air Cav but now they keep getting bumped in my painting queue by things that I know will get played sooner.

Just finished the episode, and congrats on another great one!

Your review of Epic really makes me want to pull out all of that Epic IG stuff I have and start getting it ready to play. I'm not sure where I can go around these parts for a game, though! Also, I'm a little disappointed to hear that the nice color rulebook for the game is a bit obsolete due to the web revisions.

And thanks to Craig for the Air Bender review. I was curious about this movie, but now I think I'll wait until it comes out on home movie and/or cable to see it.

While Epic sounds awesome, I have to agree with Russ. Getting into it looks pretty difficult if you have no one around you that's into it. Battlefleet Gothic, that we have. Alas, no Epic. There was a middling attempt at a Blood Bowl league, but that didn't seem to take. Without proper GW support, I think that I'll not see, much less play, a game of Epic for some time. So many specialist games, so little time to put in to getting them off the ground.

I haven't had a time to run 'Deathwatch - Final Sanction' yet. I am loving the Horde rules. About the only other game that I've played that had such a system was 'Teenagers From Outer Space' in which you could run through a mob of angry fighting folk if you were after a specific objective, although you would almost get always get someone who would want to fight his/her way through.

Finally, thanks, Yakface. I may just have the right excuse to get an iPad now.

Once again, great show as always and helped get me through a five hour plane ride.

I ran Deathwatch-Final Sanction at my FLGS (Game Vault Fredericksburg VA) for Free RPG Day. By cutting a few plot corners we barely got it done in three hours but somer great encounters were lost in the expediency; it is a meaty adventure. I wish we had some of the other options that the rulebook offered although I understand that this was that "free first hit" from FF that drug dealers usually give their customers to make them want more and so had to be condensed. It was an excellent time and I look forward to running it for my regular group. I did put some prep into it to include the figures below, made out of my lest dregs of bits so you will see some creative uses to fit the four Deathwatch Marines from the book:


Yes the pict is blurry but you know how Space Marines are; they would not keep still.

Just finished the latest episode...while generally entertaining in that typical D6 style...this wasn't the best episode for me. Lemme tell ya why ('cause I know you're dying to know!)

I'm not a 40K player...so an episode comprised of two major segments tied to 40K left me a little cold. Plus, I'm not an RPG guy, so the 40K RPG stuff just isn't my bag.

As a miniatures gamer Epic does sound interesting, BUT as Russ stated in his final comments the fact that it's not supported by GW makes the game not even a blip on my radar. In fact, during the entire segment I kept saying, "But, GW doesn't even support this game anymore...do they?" But, I'm glad that Craig is digging it. There's nothing better than a game you're excited about and, better yet, can find players for! So, even though it doesn't appear Epic is in MY future...I look forward to updates from Craig in future Achievements in Gaming.

I also gotta agree with Russ about the 'gaming snob' thing. I, too, would much rather play a slickly produced game with a full color rulebook and easily available product. I just said to my wife the other day that I've been spoiled by FFG and their overall production values. I like and want a pretty package and presentation for my games. Even back in my original high school D&D days in the early 80s I couldn't stand the third party products from Judges Guild. They always felt cheap and poorly done compared to official TSR product (which is scary, considering the production values on TSR product of the day).

So, yeah, not my favorite episode. But, I listened all the way through anyway ;-) Maybe next time don't load up episodes so 40K heavy. Variety is the spice of life after all ;-)

Thanks guys!

Jeff Cope wrote:As a miniatures gamer Epic does sound interesting, BUT as Russ stated in his final comments the fact that it's not supported by GW makes the game not even a blip on my radar. In fact, during the entire segment I kept saying, "But, GW doesn't even support this game anymore...do they?" But, I'm glad that Craig is digging it. There's nothing better than a game you're excited about and, better yet, can find players for! So, even though it doesn't appear Epic is in MY future...I look forward to updates from Craig in future Achievements in Gaming.

Interesting POV. I totally get the "dead game syndrome" issue. There is a big question about this though: Why? You can still get the rules and the models, and there are plenty of non-GW 6mm sci-fi models out there to expand the range beyond that (or save on costs) if you want to. So what "support" from GW do you need. Why does "official" support mean so much more than the myriad of homebrew stuff, much of it pretty good to be honest, on the web? Why does the fact that White Dwarf not feature the game any more bother you? As if White Dwarf had published an interesting article on any game system in the last 4 years anyhow?

I'm not criticising your point of view, as, to be honest, I tend to share it! For some reason a "dead" game (even if in the case of Epic, it is really more "undead" really) does have less appeal to me too than a "live" one. However I have come to realise that I may be cutting off my own nose to spite my face with that attitude. I'm potentially missing out on fun gaming and modelling (I love doing 6mm terrain!) opportunities simply because it isn't flavour of the month with the guys who sell the stuff. To be brutally honest, it seems somewhat irrational! And its something I deliberately try to change my own mind on because of that.

Of course, "dead" games are harder to find players for than "live" ones, we all know that, but that is really a seperate issue. I'm really interested why many if us seem to have this allergy to "dead" games inbuilt in our DNA. And I'm very interested in challenging it!

Jeff Cope wrote:I also gotta agree with Russ about the 'gaming snob' thing. I, too, would much rather play a slickly produced game with a full color rulebook and easily available product. I just said to my wife the other day that I've been spoiled by FFG and their overall production values. I like and want a pretty package and presentation for my games. Even back in my original high school D&D days in the early 80s I couldn't stand the third party products from Judges Guild. They always felt cheap and poorly done compared to official TSR product (which is scary, considering the production values on TSR product of the day).

Now this is also an interesting POV. One I've chatted with Craig about myself. There is definitely a trend (look at the new WFB rulebook for instance) to increase the production values and increase the price accordingly, of accompanying books. Now, I too would rather read a lovely colour book, and I do agree that the cost of the book is greater if it is coloured, of course. And £45 for a 500+ page full colour, low (in book terms) production run book is not unreasonable. But I do not want to pay £45 just to find out if I want to play the game! To me, high-priced, glossy colour books are lovely, but are a real barrier to entry. I'll hazard £15 to £20 on a ruleset that I haven't played before, but I won't hazard £45. Particularly not on a game that in its previous incarnations I wouldn't touch with someone else's! So is it good for the hobby or bad? I guess yer pays yer money, yer takes yer chance...

I was wondering about the "dead game syndrome" as well when listening to the podcast. I suppose it depends on how you approach the game -- If you are thinking here is the interesting 40K based game that I could get into you might be concerned that not all the armies are complete or that you might not find an opponent. On the other hand if you are thinking here is a ruleset that I can use with my existing 6mm Sci-fi models you might not really care that much about the level of support.

Back in the day I prefered the Judges Guild stuff to the TSR stuff -- most of it was awful but there were a few real gems in there and I found most of the TSR stuff to be quite samey after a while (I think the JG stuff was alos quite a bit cheaper which as well which would have been more important to me back then).

Now though, I think my main reluctance to look at a new rulebook comes from the time it will take me to read it more than the cost so if I think I will get some enjoyment out of the pictures I might pick it up where I wouldn't read something that was just text -- which is probably why I have nearly all the Warhammer Ancient Battle books even though I only have one (very small, and not quite finished) WAB army.

Great comments everyone. Love the feedback.

Jeff wrote:So, yeah, not my favorite episode. But, I listened all the way through anyway ;-) Maybe next time don't load up episodes so 40K heavy. Variety is the spice of life after all ;-)

Fear not Jeff, next episode has NO 40k themed content. In fact, neither of the main segments are even about stuff themed in the future!

Osbad wrote:There is definitely a trend (look at the new WFB rulebook for instance) to increase the production values and increase the price accordingly, of accompanying books. Now, I too would rather read a lovely colour book, and I do agree that the cost of the book is greater if it is coloured, of course. And £45 for a 500+ page full colour, low (in book terms) production run book is not unreasonable. But I do not want to pay £45 just to find out if I want to play the game! To me, high-priced, glossy colour books are lovely, but are a real barrier to entry. I'll hazard £15 to £20 on a ruleset that I haven't played before, but I won't hazard £45. Particularly not on a game that in its previous incarnations I wouldn't touch with someone else's! So is it good for the hobby or bad? I guess yer pays yer money, yer takes yer chance...

Well, I'm not sure that in this day and age of printing technology that color means significantly more expensive. There are many examples of small companies putting out great looking, full color books at reasonable prices. Spartan Games comes to mind, Red Hat's new Dresden RPG books are another.

I think page count and hardcover vs soft cover drive price more.

What we're seeing with WHFB is GW's brilliant marketing team in action. Produce a massive, glorious, expensive version of the rule book to get all the money from all the die-hard fans up front. Then later produce a starter set with a small, portable rule book for the beginners.

Of course the flaw here is that you've still got to buy the $60 starter set with possibly models you don't want to get the 'small book' version.

But none of that is a function of color or product quality. It is a product of marketing.

I think the way Wyrd Miniatures, Privateer Press, Battlefront and Spartan Games all do it is the "Best" way. Full color books, reasonably sized for portability, priced at around $30. Then buy starter sets for the faction you want.

Hmmm... maybe there is a show topic in here someplace.

duncana wrote: was wondering about the "dead game syndrome" as well when listening to the podcast. I suppose it depends on how you approach the game -- If you are thinking here is the interesting 40K based game that I could get into you might be concerned that not all the armies are complete or that you might not find an opponent. On the other hand if you are thinking here is a ruleset that I can use with my existing 6mm Sci-fi models you might not really care that much about the level of support.

Yeah the "Dead Game" concept is interesting. It hurt my rating more because I know there are many gamers who prefer live games, and therefore it will reduce its appeal to them.

Also, it depends how you define support. GW does still sell the stuff, but do they offer up new leagues and scenarios? Do they provide tourney and prize support? New league rules? Updated 'official FAQ's' etc. Not for Epic.

Other games, such as Malifaux, Warmachine/Hordes, WH40K, WHFB, Flames of War, etc. all have this level of player support direct from the company. Epic must rely on it's fan base.

So that's why my rating was so low. In a world where options such as the above exist, Epic does pale a bit by comparison.

I realize that there are folk out there that have their disappointments (After all, not-liking leads to hate. There is no hate, only disappointments.) which make trying something different a bit of a trial. However, as someone who has managed to live 12 years with someone with a leaning to that most disappointing of film genres, the disaster film; I can still take some measure of entertainment from hearing her talk about the various iteration of 'Airport'. For some episodes, I have had to utilize the skills that I have learned from such a life. I pass them on to you, the reader.

How to Enjoy Listening to Games Discussed That You Don't Care About:

(Cue Echoing Russ): INNOVATIVE MECHANICS! -

I know I'm going to catch flak for this, but I have very little interest in reading the Dresden Files. My pile of books that I'm looking forward to reading is as tall as me. To make matters worse, two of my friends are of the cult of those whose eyes glow over like they have witnessed the lord of all creation when they talk about them. Perhaps the books are all that. However, such reverence works directly disproportional to my desire to read it.

When, in Total Fan Girl, Nicole is gushing about the new RPG, you would think that I would immediately go to the show notes to see when the next segment starts for a quick sanctuary from the Dresden-verse. Instead, I continued to listen. I picked up two new GM'ing tools that I can apply to any game I'm likely to start. I'm not likely to pick up the book any time soon, but I'll gladly note where I got the idea.

To bring it into even sharper focus, the Deathwatch rules add this whole Horde concept; which if you haven't read it yet, I suggest you do. (If you GM at all, that is.) When I'm running D&D, I like to throw mobs of people/monsters at the heroes. With some of my players, this gets bogged into a who has done the most damage bog. With the horde rule, it will make such things move along faster.

I keep typing and erasing, which boils down to give something a chance. Look past the skull covered dustjacket, and look at the mechanics. While the outside may not seem to have anything for you, inside there might be the part you need to make one of your own games even more Epic.

(Yeah, I did that, sorry.)

I was wondering about the "dead game syndrome" as well when listening to the podcast. I suppose it depends on how you approach the game -- If you are thinking here is the interesting 40K based game that I could get into you might be concerned that not all the armies are complete or that you might not find an opponent. On the other hand if you are thinking here is a ruleset that I can use with my existing 6mm Sci-fi models you might not really care that much about the level of support.

I am not a fan of the term 'dead game' and prefer to say that games are in a 'serious but stable state'. Different people place different importance in whether a game is 'dead' or not, and it really depends on what you are looking for in a game. For example, there was a period towards the end of Epic third edition when the players looked at the state of 40K at the time and smiled a little smugly, as 40K players were forced to carry rule books, faqs, codexes, WD articles and an entire folder of material, while Epic as 'dead' had the basic rules and one or two update documents. I think that the real problem is the lack of official stamping. Epic had this problem as fourth edition support slowly withered. While the community has always put forward rules and ammendments throughout Epic Armageddon (even initially, Jervis opened up core rules development to a subsection of the playing community, and all SGs had assigned a rules committee made up of a handful of key players who 'met' once a year to update the core rules) these updates were always handed to Jervis who would bounce them back and forth before signing off on them and uploading them to the SG web site, at which point they became 'official'. Now, the process is almost unchanged. For Epic, for example, the same players (broadly speaking) discuss rules changes, and put forward a document of suggestions. However, now this bypasses the step of official stamping. In practice, Jervis may never have altered any rules at all, but there is a perception that the rules without his signature are 'less official', and may therefore be less balanced. (In reality, the reverse is often true, as the rules committee are dedicated to the one game, play it regularly and draw on the experiences of a global player base.)

Now though, I think my main reluctance to look at a new rulebook comes from the time it will take me to read it more than the cost so if I think I will get some enjoyment out of the pictures I might pick it up where I wouldn't read something that was just text -- which is probably why I have nearly all the Warhammer Ancient Battle books even though I only have one (very small, and not quite finished) WAB army.

I agree with this totally. I have several rules books for games that I have no intention of ever playing. However, if I would buy a fiction book to read for that use alone, I see no reason why I cant buy a rules book for the same reason.

Well, I'm not sure that in this day and age of printing technology that color means significantly more expensive. There are many examples of small companies putting out great looking, full color books at reasonable prices. Spartan Games comes to mind, Red Hat's new Dresden RPG books are another.

I think page count and hardcover vs soft cover drive price more.

I think that we disagree on the definition of a 'small company' here. To me, Spartan are actually a medium sized company in our niche industry. Any company that has a staff where this is their only (or even main) job, qualifies it as medium in my book. There are many, many small companies out there which are made up of people who do this because they love it, and they do it when their 'real job' ends in a day. For this type of comany, getting any book printed up can be a large commitment, and going to full colour and perfect binding may simply not be possible.

Also, it depends how you define support. GW does still sell the stuff, but do they offer up new leagues and scenarios? Do they provide tourney and prize support? New league rules? Updated 'official FAQ's' etc. Not for Epic.

I think that this is mostly perception, more importantly than 'real, on the ground' support. For me, the two key ingredients to seperate a 'dead' game from a supported one are new miniature releases, and faqs/rules updates.

EDIT: I forgot the blatant advertising! Anyone looking for Epic opponents could take a look here: http://www.tacticalwargames.net/archive/cgi/players.cgi

Hey Guys:

This is the best. Really good forum posts. I enjoy reading the topic of the dead game, and agree that although that terms sounds mights probably is not the right term. It is more like the one post said, its the "doing just fine fan based wants an official tag" game.

Also like the last post on the size of the company. Spartan games probably fits into the Medium Category.

[hijack] was wondering if the forum would weigh in on this, if a different HWM idea comes to mind, should I pause the DnD play by podcast session, have a "normal" HWM and go back to it, or not. What say you all?

Hollywood.

I am enjoying the DnD by podcast but I wouldn't mind if you skipped a podcast here and there.

Is there a brief recap of what happened each seesion anywhere?

Osbad wrote:
Interesting POV. I totally get the "dead game syndrome" issue. There is a big question about this though: Why? You can still get the rules and the models, and there are plenty of non-GW 6mm sci-fi models out there to expand the range beyond that (or save on costs) if you want to. So what "support" from GW do you need. Why does "official" support mean so much more than the myriad of homebrew stuff, much of it pretty good to be honest, on the web? Why does the fact that White Dwarf not feature the game any more bother you? As if White Dwarf had published an interesting article on any game system in the last 4 years anyhow?

Actually, Paul, you're right.

My main game these days is AT-43. While it's technically not dead (there's a 2.0 version coming later this year, but it has certainly been resting), there hasn't be a new release for my Karmans in quite some time. Well over a year. But, I've got more than I can ever field in a given game, so there's lots of variety and options available to me still. But, it's still "my game", and I still have a fantastic time playing it. So, it kinda kills my arguments against Epic, doesn't it.

I will say this, 'though, in regards to my own particular gaming quirks and your comment about "plenty of non-GW 6mm sci-fi models out there to expand the range"...I only like to play with official components. I really dislike proxying. But, that's just me.

Nice stuff, guys. I've got to say that in 99% of the cases I'm totally in line with wanting the latest hotness, the full color rulebooks, and the skads of new models coming out regularly. However, for whatever reason, Epic for me is that last 1%, and I really wanted to share that with our listeners. There's gotta be a reason for my love of this game, and so I thought that would translate through our review. Oh, and I got Russ to agree to it

And as for 'small' companies . . . yeah, I'd have to say that Spartan and Wyrd come under the heading YOUNG, not SMALL. With multiple people working full time, they are definitely medium companies, and it wouldn't be fair to hold a truly small, one or two man, second job type company to the same standards.

That being said, though, I still don't think that 'it's one guy in his garage!' is a reason to settle for anything less than what you're looking for.

I guess I'm just looking for Epic, is all. Honestly, it's now my prefered way of experiencing the 40K Universe on the table top.

But I, too, share a bias against third party models. At least when there are primary sources still available.

On the gripping hand, I don't have an opinion on play-by-podcast rpgs . . .

Some nice points.

One of the strengths of the hobby of wargaming is that it allows such diversity of taste amongst its adherents yet can still satisfy them all.

Our common failing as wargamers is that we all expect (irrationally and against all evidence to the contrary) that all other gamers want the same thing out of their hobby as they do.

Also, we tend totally to be internally inconsistent!

Given all things being equal, clearly a "fully supported" and "high quality graphics" is an ideal solution to gaming. It has to be the case that there is something special about a game to tempt us away from the "easy fix" gaming solution. And no game can tempt everyone that far.

I would say in the UK, with its greater tradition of independent clubs and small, local "wargames shows", and arguably a generally lower tolerance of what may be seen by some as "crass commercialism" we see a thriving community of players of all sorts of non-mainstream games. With the greater domination on in-store gaming in the USA, I would not be surprised to see a lower exposure for more "DIY" solutions!

It has to be said that there are many for whom the "DIY" approach (whether that is the small independent producer, or the fan-supported Specialist Games, or whatever) has greater appeal than the "off the shelf" solution. Definitely they are in a minority simply because few have the time or the skills or the inclination to take that route. And the more mainstream wargaming becomes, the smaller will become that minority.

Its worth remembering though that even Warhammer started out that way. I recall a battle report of a Pelennor Fields game way back in WD 84 which used the first edition of Warhammer, and models and terrain from all over the place. Much of it scratch built. clearly the growth of GW over the years is a result of their being able to provide more and more of a "one stop shop" for wargaming and making the entry into the hobby less of a challenge.

This being the case, clearly there is no right or wrong answer to which style of game is "better". Its always a matter of personal preference. Neither "side" (if we are on sides - I suspect most of us who have been gaming for a while are not 100% in either camp) has cause to be snobby about the other - as Russ and Craig's banter at the end of the article showed.

I would only advocate that those who judge a game simply by the level of easy-access to bling could miss out on a treat if they aren't careful. You may find that some of the games you dismiss as being "dead" or "unsupported" or "monochrome" or whatever may turn out to be far better than you believe. And of course, its wrong for those that are prepared to make a little extra effort to look down on those who haven't the inclination to bother. We all have different amounts of time, and "filling in the blanks" of a given game may be simply not fun for some. And that's fair enough.

Personally I'm glad that Epic received the positive report it did. It's a game system I enjoy. It needn't cost much money (particularly if you start with a plastic Marine or Ork army of eBay from the old Space Marine days), painting at 6mm scale is (rather counterintuitively, I admit) a breeze with washes and drybrushing, and terrain model is great fun - you can make wonderful diddy buildings and stuff out of bottletops, springs, copper wire, and all sorts of junk in just minutes! Much easier than terrain modelling at 28mm scale. Plus of course, the actual game, now it has been tempered by the Epic Rules Committee is a masterpiece of rules design, and results in a really fun match. So, if you are at all intrigued by the game (and who doesn't fancy fielding an entire tank division on the tabletop? With multiple titans!) I do encourage you to give it a go.

I concur with Russ's score. Of course the lack of full, shiney support will be offputting to gamers who have got used to accessing a complete game just "off the shelf", But for the rest of us, who can perhaps remember that back in the day, all gaming used to be this way, it really is a paragon of its art.

Such a shame that GW couldn't work a way out of making enough money off it to develop it. Or is it? As things stand we have wonderful rules that work very, very well and are properly balanced. If the GW Studio had been left to balance them on their own, without the input of the Epic Rules Committee, would they have done such a good job? Judging by their handling of 40k and WFB, I suspect maybe not....

I guess you pays yer money, you takes yer chance! It all depends on what you want out of a game!

Master-Terraformer wrote:Nice stuff, guys. I've got to say that in 99% of the cases I'm totally in line with wanting the latest hotness, the full color rulebooks, and the skads of new models coming out regularly. However, for whatever reason, Epic for me is that last 1%, and I really wanted to share that with our listeners. There's gotta be a reason for my love of this game, and so I thought that would translate through our review. Oh, and I got Russ to agree to it

And right there, despite my personal lack of interest, is why I continued to listen through the whole segment. I wanted to hear why you enjoyed the game so much. Frankly, despite everything I've written, if I was standing in your FLGS and you had everything all ready to go and said, "Hey! Wanna give Epic a go?", I'd say "Absolutely".

That's part of my enjoyment of the show is hearing what games you guys are passionate about, and why. I'll even listen to Hollywood talk about why he loves Agricola. Well....maybe ;-)

Heck, I'll go several episodes w/o hearing a review of a game that I want to check out, but I enjoy the discussion none the less.

Osbad wrote:
Also, we tend totally to be internally inconsistent!

Guilty as charged!

I like the DnD by podcast. If you find that you have something else you'd rather do for an episode or two, then cool.

I am still working my way through the epic segment of the show, but I did want to post a couple of points.

Firstly, the position of Warhammer Ancient Battles.

As you rightly say, GW core run 40K, Warhammer Fantasy Battles and LotR. SG used to take care of the Specialist Games. The ancients games (Warhammer Ancients, Warmaster Medieval, Warmaster Ancients, and the rumoured Warmaster Napoleonics) were set up with another company, like the way that Black Library works - Warhammer Historical:

http://www.warhammer-historical.com/

I think that this was made a part of Forge World a year or so ago in a cost cutting measure. SG was then disbanded and the games folded into the main GW stable and web site, leaving no GW staff support for them at all and the forums were moved off the GW site.

For Epic 40K (3rd edition), I do think that the designers broadly achiveved what they set out to do. E40K is not a bad game at all, and in many ways it is the most 'realistic' of the series. It abstracts out a load of details. A true battlefield commander doesnt need to know precisely what weapons a tank is armed with, only how that tank - or a company of that tank - performs on the battlefield. E40K does do this. But, the game came after a couple of more detailed games, set in a universe that many people visit specifically for the background and the detail. E40K does have a particularly bad reputation, but it is not totally deserved. It has the problem that it was a departure from other versions of the Epic rules and design methodology. This means that Epic players had trouble with it as it was not the game that they signed up to play, and the people who would normally like it didnt try it because it was 'Epic'. (Just my opinion.)

Anyhow, I also wanted to say that we are very aware that the current scene regarding Epic can be very confusing. To this end, I am working on a web site section that will explain all the details of the various rules sets, and provide links to the rules and updates to make it easier to grab what you need to play the version that grabs you.

Many thanks to the D6 team for a fair and detailed review of the game.

At the risk of just talking to myself here....

A small correction on the Tau in Epic. There are actually two Tau lists. The main one has been in development for a long time and is actually up to version 6.2. This is fan-developed. The second was published by ForgeWorld in IA3. This was actually based (it seems) on an earlier version of the fan developed list (around version 3.4). As such, it is popularly perceived as unbalanced in a number of areas (for example, the Manta). FW also produced the Epic Tau range until about a year ago, when most of it was dropped, with rumours of some (unspecified which) coming back.

There was also discussion on weapon range against movement distance. Given that the 40K universe would hopefully include weapons with a greater range than todays sidearms, and that the Barrett M82 is credited with a max range of 1800m, this would scale to around 60cm in Epic game terms for a sidearm (80cm for the longest sniper shot!). So, some shortening of range has to happen. Also, as far as I am aware, range shortening/movement increase is a product mainly of game balance. With longer weapon ranges and shorter movement, the game becomes far more static very quickly, as it makes much more sense to sustained fire at anything in range, and a static game is far less fun than a fluid and dynamic one.

Finally, to reiterate about the use of AT weapons against infantry. It is true that a LasCannon is able to drop an infantry trooper with relative ease, but this would reduce the five man squad to 80% efficiency, still mostly effective on the battlefield. You would need at least three LasCannon hits to make an impact on an infantry squad, and therefore it is abstracted as discounted in the rules.

Thanks for all the great insight Cybershadow. And thanks for all you do to support the Epic community.

Maybe I'm missing it but where are the links to the epic rules y'all were going to post?

Go to this webpage:-

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/

Join the forum and browse the wiki for lists.

Go to GW and the specialist games resource page for the rules.

Sorted

Thanks Mephiston. Was looking for that too.

Thanks for all the great insight Cybershadow. And thanks for all you do to support the Epic community.

Actually, I just help other people and organise things. The real work is done by a whole load of community members. But, thanks....

Maybe I'm missing it but where are the links to the epic rules y'all were going to post?

I know that this has been answered, but I wanted to provide a list of places and locations for anyone looking for Epic stuff.

Firstly, the D6 episode seems to have let several people know about the game. One similar, beginner thread for information is here:

http://www.taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18732

The basic rules* and all official force lists are available on the Games Workshop site, in the SG section (under 'resources').

Tactical Command currently has development and ongoing changes for several sets of lists:

http://www.taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/viewforum.php?f=109

As stated, WikiWikiWar has a page dedicated to listing all available EA lists, their current status, the lead developer and the location:

http://www.players.tacticalwargames.net/tiki-index.php?page=Epic+Armageddon+Army+Lists

* The basic rules available from the GW web site includes some of the changes suggested by the Epic Rules Committee and the community.

duncana wrote:Another great episode, Epic is one of those games I have always been interested in but have shied away from because I really don't want to start another scale (and also due to some nightmarish micro-armour games from a decade or so ago)

Was it perchance Challenger 2000

I thought it was great, my best comment being the 'gw beetle'.

You may want to look at the fan supplements such as Epic Raiders.
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/archive/rules/epic/raiders.html
Frankly as good as a GW publication (and free to print out in colour).

If people wish to play Epic in London there are still a couple of dozen die hards hanging in there!