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.

I believe so, yes.

So then here is a picture of an Demi -Company. Lonesome HQ, 2 Cores with one having Transports and mandatory Support being Dreadnoughts and then added Sicarian Battle tanks.

Yet the other Core has mixed unit of Assault Marines and Terminators so my gues is that some units can upgrade to include some other troops rather then just weaponry.

I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Four. The Kratos has four weapons.

Turret
Co-Axial Autocannon
Hull
Sponsons.

That’s it. If you’re overwhelmed by that, I don’t know what to say. Spesh as that’s a Heavy Tank, so most others are going to have Turret and Sponson only.

Six, if the hull and sponson weapons are actually stats for a single of them. And yes, it's a Heavy Tank... So? So is the Land Raider. And you could have oodles of those.

But the thing is that a detachment of those, even if they all shoot the same enemy detachment, will need four separate rolls to resolve, because each gun has a different to hit, a different armor penalty and different special rules.

To resolve shooting for a single detachment, out of how many? Each round?

Feels like way too fiddle for a game where I want to be the general commanding sweep movements and gak.

But to each their own. I'll keep playing other games, it's still cool to see new minis.

Also, I think portraying people that think that's excessive detail as being "overwhelmed" is purposefully misrepresenting the issue, here.

twentypence wrote:
So a Legion Terminator model / unit is one base / stand with five miniatures on it.

A Legion Terminator Detachment has 4, 6, or 8 Legion Terminator models.

The Legion Terminator Detachment takes up a Vanguard Battlefield Role (complete guess).

And a Vanguard Battlefield Role is one of the optional choices in a Legion Demi-Company Formation.

And there needs to be at least one Formation for each full 1,500 points in an Army.

Have I got that right?

So Formation > Detachment > Model | Unit | Base | Stand > Miniature

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Andrew1975 wrote:
[
As for the limit of two stands of Terminators in the box, I'm going to guess you can somehow add them to a tactical detachment?.....I don't know, the box contents are making less sense now. You only get two stands of each of the non tactical stands, so not enough for their own detachments.

According to the leaked docs floating around, you can indeed add them to tactical detachments.

Definitely looking like most people will want to buy two boxes. Sucks if you don't want the solar auxilia though.

Oh, Im sure you will eventually just be able to buy the Space marine side in a separate box, but then you will have some half detachments of Solar Auxilia, best to just get two launch boxes.......GW being crazy like a fox as always.

Now if you want that big detachment of eight terminator stands....thats 4 launch boxes. Just like the old days, how many boxes did I have to buy to get a complete detachments of Terminators? I don't remember exactly but I think it was like 3.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Albertorius wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Four. The Kratos has four weapons.

Turret
Co-Axial Autocannon
Hull
Sponsons.

That’s it. If you’re overwhelmed by that, I don’t know what to say. Spesh as that’s a Heavy Tank, so most others are going to have Turret and Sponson only.

Six, if the hull and sponson weapons are actually stats for a single of them. And yes, it's a Heavy Tank... So? So is the Land Raider. And you could have oodles of those.

But the thing is that a detachment of those, even if they all shoot the same enemy detachment, will need four separate rolls to resolve, because each gun has a different to hit, a different armor penalty and different special rules.

To resolve shooting for a single detachment, out of how many? Each round?

Feels like way too fiddle for a game where I want to be the general commanding sweep movements and gak.

But to each their own. I'll keep playing other games, it's still cool to see new minis.

Also, I think portraying people that think that's excessive detail as being "overwhelmed" is purposefully misrepresenting the issue, here.

I can see it getting fiddely especially if they allow you to take different options on different vehicles in the same detachment, but I still don't see it being any kind of huge insurmountable burden. I don't remember seeing people taking multiple Superheavy Tank companies in 2nd ed, at least not very often. It looks like most stands and vehicles have only a couple of weapons slots.

 Andrew1975 wrote:
I can see it getting fiddely especially if they allow you to take different options on different vehicles in the same detachment, but I still don't see it being any kind of huge insurmountable burden. I don't remember seeing people taking multiple Superheavy Tank companies in 2nd ed, at least not very often. It looks like most stands and vehicles have only a couple of weapons slots.

Again, nobody said anything about insurmountable.

It's simply not a direction I want to go for my army level game fix. I simply see too many things to take account for for every single unit, what with one or more weapons, each with special rules, plus special rules of the units, plus special rules of the faction...

And at least in Epic 40k Superheavy tank companies were a dime a dozen.

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Depends if many are unique.

Bulky for example? It’s either a Keyword, or “each stand counts as two for transports” on every unit it applies to, making a guess as to the actual rules.

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Should they not? Why is that?

If they are simple and give Terminators their flavour why does it matter if there are 8 rules there?

One is just saying they can't damage tanks, one is a 6++, one is deep strike.

I only came in at Epic 40k and then E:A but this all seems pretty standard to me.

Edit: Would imagine bulky is something to stop Terminator equivalents from using Rhino level transports, but allow them to b be transported in LRs / THs etc

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Should they not? Why is that?

If they are simple and give Terminators their flavour why does it matter if there are 8 rules there?

One is just saying they can't damage tanks, one is a 6++, one is deep strike.

I only came in at Epic 40k and then E:A but this all seems pretty standard to me.

Edit: Would imagine bulky is something to stop Terminator equivalents from using Rhino level transports, but allow them to b be transported in LRs / THs etc

Because at this scale Terminators shouldn't be much more than slightly better heavy Infantry. All those 8 USR make them a bit more special.

Yes, in HH and 40k they are great, but those are 28mm games that capture a very small glimpse of a far wider battle. Epic is zoomed out by quite a few magnitudes, so units need to lessen in accordance.

The USR's may be simple to remember (more than likely), and as everyone will have access to fielding Terminators, it will mean that everyone knows their rules and thus will be easy to keep track of.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Depends if many are unique.

Bulky for example? It’s either a Keyword, or “each stand counts as two for transports” on every unit it applies to, making a guess as to the actual rules.

I doubt any of those are unique. Again it isn't an issue about rule abilities, but rather more about scale focus. This is Epic, Terminators even in Epic are just better heavy Infantry.

 Pacific wrote:
My concern here is that they have taken a game (in Epic Space Marine) for which one of it's greatest strength was it's streamling and speed of play, and easy to remember rules, and made it immediately less accessible.

Yes if I play tons I will remember the rules but how exactly are you meant to bring new players or casuals in? Or my mate who has two hours every fortnight to play when he is away from work, finally managed to get the kid to bed and wants a quick game?

This feels again like it is going to be another case of Necromunda, "for us, not for them" and casuals can wait outside. Completely going against the general trend of how game design within the industry is seeking to streamline, cognisant that gaming is competing with 100 other leisure activities and people have less free time than ever.

Do the people that design these games never play *anything* else from outside the circles that they operate in? Realise I may be going a bit OTT here, but I'd the rest of this game follows this trend into a granularity U-bend, you don't need to point out where those end up.

This is where Titanicus does deserves praise because not only does it provide basic and advanced rules, but also two different ways to play with either the detailed titans or the streamlined knights. Its good for novice and casual players, and more so if one keeps in mind that open play is a thing; the ruleset is no longer a manifesto but now an array of options to choose from.

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Should they not? Why is that?

If they are simple and give Terminators their flavour why does it matter if there are 8 rules there?

One is just saying they can't damage tanks, one is a 6++, one is deep strike.

I only came in at Epic 40k and then E:A but this all seems pretty standard to me.

Edit: Would imagine bulky is something to stop Terminator equivalents from using Rhino level transports, but allow them to b be transported in LRs / THs etc

Because at this scale Terminators shouldn't be much more than slightly better heavy Infantry. All those 8 USR make them a bit more special.

Yes, in HH and 40k they are great, but those are 28mm games that capture a very small glimpse of a far wider battle. Epic is zoomed out by quite a few magnitudes, so units need to lessen in accordance.

The USR's may be simple to remember (more than likely), and as everyone will have access to fielding Terminators, it will mean that everyone knows their rules and thus will be easy to keep track of.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Depends if many are unique.

Bulky for example? It’s either a Keyword, or “each stand counts as two for transports” on every unit it applies to, making a guess as to the actual rules.

I doubt any of those are unique. Again it isn't an issue about rule abilities, but rather more about scale focus. This is Epic, Terminators even in Epic are just better heavy Infantry.

In 2nd ed Terminators were basically just slightly better infantry and they had very little flavor, didn't feel like terminators really. They fixed that in later versions. 4 stands of Termonators in two Spartans was a detachment to be feared in Epic Armageddon. Terminators should be noticeably tougher I think they may have gotten it just right actually this time, in my opinion anyway.

The thunderhawk spiel on warcomm says it has large assault transport that lets it carry bulky infantry.

 Flinty wrote:
The thunderhawk spiel on warcomm says it has large assault transport that lets it carry bulky infantry.

They sure beefed up the Thunderhawk from its 2nd ed origins.

From the five special rules listed on terminators, two of them are really only relevant for initial deployment and are likely mutually exclusive. You'll either teleport in or use a transport.

From the way the article is phrased I expect Bulky models can simply only go into Large Transports, and regular transports take any other infantry.

I do think that maybe invuln saves should have been part of the unit statline (such as giving them a "4+/6+" save) instead of a special rule, but they may not be common enough for that to be worthwhile.

 stonehorse wrote:


Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

But they do remain slightly better inf?

Assault & light are both rules shared by bolters.

Bulky & deep strike will relate to what they are allowed to be transported in and how they can deploy (and are basically mandatory to reflect how everyone would expect Terminators to function).

So they really only have a 4+/6++ to reflect Terminator armour
Whatever accurate is to differentiate storm bolters vs bolters.
Steadfast & Implacable as morale boosts to represent elite status.

This is not vastly different from previous Epic versions of them.

Here is an attempt at some list building based on the launch box plus filling in the gaps as well as transports.

Assumptions
Using the Demi Company Formation preview
- used it as a template for SA as well
- Detachments are 1 per symbol (since some symbols listed twice)
- Guesses on which things fulfill which roles
- The vehicle choices are not required (unclear from text since they do not say compulsory or optional in their box)
The Detachment Size column in the pastebin leak indicates the number of bases in a detachment.
Rhino
- 10 points per
- carries 2 bases
- doesn't transport Bulky units
Arvus
- 12 points per
- carries 2 bases
- doesn't transport Bulky units

(See attached Image)

Legion Astartes is 655 points
Titans are 660 points
Solar Auxilla is 714 points

Using the preview rule of 70% from main and 30% from allies, you can have the following:
Legion Astartes 655 points + 900 points (Assuming you can fits a formation of SA with 1 Titan or 2 Titans with small formation of SA)
= Means you need 1445 more points of Legion Astartes...

Solar Auxilla 714 + 900 (Assuming LA with 1 Titan or 2 Titans and small formation of LA)
= Means you need 1386 more points of Solar Auxilla

Really hope there will be some Formation/Company boxes that can fill out these points at a reasonable cost.

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Should they not? Why is that?

If they are simple and give Terminators their flavour why does it matter if there are 8 rules there?

One is just saying they can't damage tanks, one is a 6++, one is deep strike.

I only came in at Epic 40k and then E:A but this all seems pretty standard to me.

Edit: Would imagine bulky is something to stop Terminator equivalents from using Rhino level transports, but allow them to b be transported in LRs / THs etc

Because at this scale Terminators shouldn't be much more than slightly better heavy Infantry. All those 8 USR make them a bit more special.

Yes, in HH and 40k they are great, but those are 28mm games that capture a very small glimpse of a far wider battle. Epic is zoomed out by quite a few magnitudes, so units need to lessen in accordance.

The USR's may be simple to remember (more than likely), and as everyone will have access to fielding Terminators, it will mean that everyone knows their rules and thus will be easy to keep track of.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I'm a bit concerned about the Terminators having 8 special rules... before Legion specific traits. Seems a bit much, especially for Epic scale.

Still not enough to put me off the game, as I suspect that this won't be an issue during play, due to the limited nature of the HH setting.

But these are just USR and really not that complicated.

Never said it was, just that 8 USR's for Terminators seems a bit much. This is Epic, those Terminators shouldn't need that many at this scale.

Depends if many are unique.

Bulky for example? It’s either a Keyword, or “each stand counts as two for transports” on every unit it applies to, making a guess as to the actual rules.

I doubt any of those are unique. Again it isn't an issue about rule abilities, but rather more about scale focus. This is Epic, Terminators even in Epic are just better heavy Infantry.

There's definitely differing opinions on what a game like Epic should be, but I absolutely agree with you.

IMO, in a game like Epic, the "flavour" of individual units needn't be represented in rules, it should be represented in the imagination and narrative of the players.

Special rules, even if they are "Universal" Special Rules***, should be kept to a bare minimum and used to represent things that can have a special effect on the scale of the whole battle.


***As an aside, I've always hated when games have too many "Universal" special rules, hated them in 40k but especially in a game like Epic they should be kept to a minimum and only as a fall back for things that can't be represented well in the baseline rules.

People that have problems with the Terminators rules......which would you get rid of? Bulky, Deep Strike, their invol save, these are all very appropriate for Terminators to have. They don't get extra flamer, assault canon or cyclone missle launcher attacks (which I argue they should, they did in some editions). They basically had all the same rules in 2nd ed, they were just not USRs and boy did 2nd Ed desperately need USRs.

In 2nd ed a warhound was -1 to hit because it was a small and fast target.....but smaller and faster than what? Things like....well most anything else that was smaller and faster didn't get -1 to hit, eldar Jetbikes were much smaller and much faster didn't get -1 to hit because they didn't have USRs. Every vehicle and unit had its own special rules that were very hard to keep track of and became a jumbled mess that even GW couldn't untangle. There was no standardization and it was up to whoever was writing rules that week. USRs are much better in my opinion.

Some flyers got lucky and had -1 to hit while others didn't, there was no rationale to it. At least with USRs we have standards.

Billicus wrote:
Giving a large gun platform tank a couple of weapons is "senseless complexity"? Wtf is the matter with people

The Kratos was just one example. See also the many special rules on a single unit, which feels like too much detail for a game at this scale.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Four. The Kratos has four weapons.

Turret
Co-Axial Autocannon
Hull
Sponsons.

That’s it. If you’re overwhelmed by that, I don’t know what to say. Spesh as that’s a Heavy Tank, so most others are going to have Turret and Sponson only.

I'm not overwhelmed; it's simply that I feel it should be more consolidated than that for the scale - does the co-axial gun really need to be its own thing? Perhaps something like the main turret, and then 'support weapons' covering the smaller arms? Again, this is supposed to be a game where whole squads of tanks are firing at once, and breaking down their weapons into even just four different profiles feels excessive.

 Andrew1975 wrote:
...but I think its really people misreading the horribly written card as having 8 weapons all the time. This card is like if you put all the Baneblade chassis options on one card and people thought you got to use all the weapons on one.

That's fair. It having them all is what I assumed, as there was no clear indicator what was an optional choice and what was default equipment. I'm not overly familiar with the chassis and its weapons layout.

feugan wrote:
Point is, multiple weapon systems on a tank aren't without precedent in Epic. Rolling to hit was easy and there are fewer steps than shooting in 40k, where a Tactical squad can readily have 4 different types of shooting after all.

To be fair, it's not yet known exactly how the shooting will work so could well have similar steps to 40k. And if a Tactical Squad having four different weapon profiles is a problem, why is the same not a problem here when the army size is supposed to be bigger? Three profiles (as in your example, one of which was a one-shot weapon) would be manageable on a standalone superheavy, but not across an entire squadron of vehicles.

 Sotahullu wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/QPejQ5Bi1biZoBhc.jpg

I think this image illustrates my concern quite well - granted, this is only part of an army rather than a whole one, but for Epic scale it feels a little small, even if you double it. If it's only going to be a little more 'zoomed out' than Horus Heresy itself is, I don't feel it's catering to the game type that, arguably, it is supposed to.

 Albertorius wrote:

Six, if the hull and sponson weapons are actually stats for a single of them. And yes, it's a Heavy Tank... So? So is the Land Raider. And you could have oodles of those.
But the thing is that a detachment of those, even if they all shoot the same enemy detachment, will need four separate rolls to resolve, because each gun has a different to hit, a different armor penalty and different special rules.
To resolve shooting for a single detachment, out of how many? Each round?
Feels like way too fiddle for a game where I want to be the general commanding sweep movements and what have you.

It's simply not a direction I want to go for my army level game fix. I simply see too many things to take account for for every single unit, what with one or more weapons, each with special rules, plus special rules of the units, plus special rules of the faction...

Essentially, all of this. My view of Epic was always of a grand scale, the kinds of battles that 40k has never been able to depict (and attempts to do so by including superheavies etc have warped it) and where grand strategy and combined firepower matters far more than an individual co-axial gun on a single tank. So far, LI does not appear to live up to that, and that's disappointing.

 MalusCalibur wrote:

 Sotahullu wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/QPejQ5Bi1biZoBhc.jpg

I think this image illustrates my concern quite well - granted, this is only part of an army rather than a whole one, but for Epic scale it feels a little small, even if you double it. If it's only going to be a little more 'zoomed out' than Horus Heresy itself is, I don't feel it's catering to the game type that, arguably, it is supposed to.

This is only around 370 points based on the leaks so not even close to the 3000pts they recommended

I guess that ultimately the design team for this game were going to make a choice about what kind of game they were going to make. Epic itself varies massively (from the very granular 1st edition, to the streamlined and fast 2nd, to the even more streamlined 3rd, back to a more granular game in 4th). It feels like, with this, that they are going for the 1st and 4th edition approach, even though the base structure of the game is based on 2nd, and that will either be more or less popular for you depending on your view of those games.

Someone made a point that I agree with that this is a game for 'Heresyheads', not casuals getting into wargaming or just wanting to throw down a few dice, and so it is designed to appeal on that basis. I personally think its a missed opportunity as one of the strengths of Epic was always its accessibility and, combined with cost, is a big reason that lots of us (and probably a good few reading this comment) first got into wargaming with Epic Space Marine. I am not sure. had I needed to keep page markers to refer to extra rules and go to that level of granularity, that would be the case again now.

We will see, in time, if GW's approach is the correct one based on the success of the game and its endurance.

having played 1st edition at some 10k points a few times and found it didn't bog down in rules detail I don't think this will be half the issue people think.

tanks having multiple weapon profiles, when operating in units, resolved with a single d6, sorry not seeing the problem - 4x Kratos firing at a few different things means rolling a few batches of dice into each. I'll take that over "this box has firepower rating x" anyday, means it can pull anti infantry and anti armour at the same time with different weapons doing different things.

Terminators having a few special rules, again not really a problem, if you have them foot slogging they are a waste, they will drop in (or be carried in), do their job clearing a bunch of infantry out, then hold or die - they always were good at their job if they got to the target

and note infantry seem to generally so far have one attack profile for ranged weapons, if anything they should generally have two but is what it is.

its a game that once you've played it a few times will significantly speed up, and yes there is a point that for people who only play occasionally it will be slower as you never get really past the initial learning curve, while this is a point I also suspect it is a bit of a red coloured fishy thing as I know I, and suspect I am not alone, would prefer a game with a bit more depth to it instead of something streamlined to the point its so generic its not worth playing it

as it stands it looks like the different types of infantry for example are different and do different things, a more generic streamlined game would in effect end up with "infantry", "light armour", "heavy armour" and maybe "super heavy armour" and probably a single stat, maybe two for each, at which point I'd go find a card counters game to be honest


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also a note on the level of detail in 1st edition

you had unit reference cards initially, though didn't really need them as the stat profile wasn't hard (type, move, CAF, what weapons and any special notes essentially) then two weapon tables (for firing at infantry and other soft targets and then for armour and hard targets - the unit profile telling you which it was)

and since typically you didn't have all that many weapons it wasn't hard to remember them - it helped they were very similar to 40k as well, e.g. bolters being 12/24cm with a +1 to hit at close range

the new profiles look even simpler given they have rolled the to hit number into the profile

I highly suspect there either will be, or will be easy to make, unit reference cards for everything you have, and that a single card would easily cover most of the infantry types

The thing is, people are trying to suggest it's complicated when it really doesn't seem to be.

Why would you be needing to have page markers? There's going to be a handful of USRs that you'll know by the end of your first game.

Have the page in the rulebook with the unit card info open and you're set for the entire game.

Vorian wrote:
The thing is, people are trying to suggest it's complicated when it really doesn't seem to be.

Why would you be needing to have page markers? There's going to be a handful of USRs that you'll know by the end of your first game.

Have the page with the unit card info in the rulebook open and you're set for the entire game.

"OMG terminators have 8 special rules?!" is such a weird take to me when the Epic Armageddon incarnation of their rules had 3 weapon profiles, 2 weapon traits, and 3 USRs to do basically the same thing.

Meanwhile the Kratos with 3-4 weapon profiles at a time is entirely on par with E:A rules for a Leman Russ (3) or Baneblades (5).

Yeah, the rules showed so far it's a turn-off to me. I'm not really interested into detailed Net-epic 2.0...and since they confirmed it won't be translated ("for now" is definitely the Necromunda / Adeptus Titanicus way - meaning "never"), I'll drop that ball.

I don't like the fact there is a morale stat in a unit's profile as well.

Take in mind that anyone commenting on this forum is, by default, really into their wargames and not a cross section of the broader wargaming demographic. So I'm attempting to view it in a wider context.

Putting a few page markers in a rulebook is fine for me, but I've had Necromunda campaigns fail because the guys playing, who only have a few hours free every few weeks, just couldn't get comfortable with the depth and complexity of the rules. We have ended up switching to One Page Rules, which employs USRs, but generally a max of one or two per unit and certainly not 8. You can fire a unit without having to refer to a weapons chart and check a loadout. I'm not saying that by any means Epic is as complex as Necromunda and we won't know for sure until it's released, but it sniffs of that design route rather than something like AoS which was (at least originally) designed as an easily accessible game.

Leopard - it's interesting you say that about 1st edition. I didn't play it myself but speaking to others they seem split on loving the granularity of 1st, hating the simplification that 2nd edition introduced, and visa-versa. I suppose ultimately there are different ways to skin a cat, and you'll come down on one side or another.

I for one like the level of detail there is currently and the rules direction. They al make sence so far and seem intuitive.

Would have liked to se a litte bit more legion specific rules than what i have seen so far to make them a bit more differnet, but the legion specific units might make that a non issue for me.

Dont se a problem with some units having more than two guns either. Just roll the things in batches or if you whant to speed things upp, roll everything at once with dirrent colored dice for each weapon