Caught the Epic 40K bug... couple of questions.

[Zenithfleet]

It's probably a combination of several things, moulds wearing out and the game being (to all intents and purposes) dropped coupled with the design changes to the 40k versions of the models. If GW ca't be bothered to support a game they most certainly won't bother to release/rerelease any plastics for it.

I can see the mismatch problem between the 40K and Epic Tyranid models - although the current Epic Orks are awfully old school too, and most of the plastic 'nids are the little critters who'd look more or less the same at 6mm scale anyway. Only the old plastic Warriors would be obviously 'wrong'. The metals would be another story, but that ought to be much cheaper to fix - if they released metals for MkII Rhinos and the like, they could presumably do it for Tyranids too. (I know it won't happen, I'm just indulging in a bit of wishful thinkerating )

BTW, I don't quite understand it when people say that GW has 'dropped' the specialist games and 'doesn't support them'. Yes, they clearly don't much care anymore, and the games' treatment is atrocious compared to the level of support they used to get. But they're still there on the website. You can get the rules (often for free) and buy the models (even at the sometimes insane prices they charge). Dropped, to me, would mean Man O' War or Warhammer Quest. Gone, vanished into the warp, never mentioned again. GW could have done that, and they haven't. That's got to count for something.

[zoggin-eck]

Having just managed to find some Tyranid sprues on the cheap - by which I mean 'costing slightly more than they'd cost if GW stocked them today' - I have to ask: why of all the Epic armies did their plastics never get put back into production?

Heh, I must have been psychic. When the online store were getting rid of all the sprues individually for one pound fifty each, I went for Tyranids, Chaos and Eldar, but mostly Tyranids I had no idea if we'd ever again see plasic Epic models available new back then.

It's probably a combination of several things, moulds wearing out and the game being (to all intents and purposes) dropped coupled with the design changes to the 40k versions of the models. If GW ca't be bothered to support a game they most certainly won't bother to release/rerelease any plastics for it.

What annoyed me was the whole Epic "Armageddon" theme. No reason to release Tyranids from the start, and it was pretty obvious they weren't going to add them unless the game really took off. We did get some new Eldar, at least

[Zenithfleet]

What annoyed me was the whole Epic "Armageddon" theme. No reason to release Tyranids from the start, and it was pretty obvious they weren't going to add them unless the game really took off. We did get some new Eldar, at least

Hmm... did the Armageddon theme come first? Or did they decide to set it on Armageddon because they only had the resources to do Imperials and Orks initially?

BTW, curse you zoggin-eck for your precognitive plastic predictions Tyranids have always, always, always been my favourite army, but the universe keeps conspiring to prevent me from collecting many of them. (Off-topic rant incoming!)

First GW stop selling the original plastic RT-era Warriors so I can't get any more synapse beasties except Hive Tyrants (I hated the old metal warriors, they looked like someone had dropped an anvil on them). Then GW take so long to do anything with 'nids during early 3rd ed that I end up collecting Eldar just to pass the time. Then they finally release the 3rd ed Codex and partly revamp the model range... just as I go to Asia and out of the hobby for a year. Then they stop selling Chestnut Ink, causing my army painting to stall for years until I discover that Coat d'Arms still makes it. Then they release the 4th ed Codex and finally finish off the range... while I'm in the wrong country for another year. And finally, of course, there's the 5th ed Codex of which we dare not speak. Now I decide to try Epic and, oh hey, 'nids just happen to be the hardest to find and most expensive of all the armies. Clearly Tzeentch is involved in all this somehow.

Anyway, I finally got all the Guard stands repaired--it took ages to clip and reglue them all, but it's done. Phew.

Just to check it with the experienced Epic 40K players, here's the detachments I have so far for Guard. These are intended as a 'studio army' - the IG will sometimes fight for my regular opponent alongside his Space Marines, and sometimes act as traitor guard for Chaos or fight with Genestealer cultists, etc - so I'm trying to make the detachments fairly generic and flexible.

Infantry - Gemini Alpha Company
HQ - Command squad w/Captain
Command squad w/Psyker
2 guardsman squads (4 units, 1 w/Commissar)
4 heavy weapon squads
Support: Ogryn squad, Catachan squad (count as Ratlings), Demolisher tank, Hydra Flak Tank
Points: 237

Infantry - Gemini Beta Company
-same as above, except there's an extra Captain in the psyker stand, and the Commissar is in one of the heavy weapon squads
Points: 247

Infantry - Melba Company
2 Rough Rider command units
4 Rough Rider units
Points: 112

Artillery detachment - The Emperor's Fist
HQ Basilisk
1 Basilisk
2 Manticores
Points: 215

Superheavy Tank Company - The Emperor's Hammer
HQ Baneblade
Shadowsword
Points: 220

I also have a tank detachment planned, but I don't have the right models yet (I've been proxying up till now). I've got three Hellhounds and a third Demolisher available, but I need some actual Leman Russes. Apart from citruswolfies, I think I need a few Chimeras to give the infantry more mobility. Is there anything else obviously missing that you'd recommend? Sentinels? Griffons? Twelve Imperator Titans?

Also, the cost for all the command squads seems excessive (since you need 1 command for every 3 squads you take). Was there anything in Firepower mag about that? I'm sure I read about it somewhere on the net...

Next up will be Orks. Just need to rebase all nine gazillion of 'em on 20mm round counters... sigh... (Revision to the very special hell: cleaning 6mm mould lines and converting Ratlings into Snotlings must feature somewhere.)

[shelfunit.]

Heh, I must have been psychic. When the online store were getting rid of all the sprues individually for one pound fifty each, I went for Tyranids, Chaos and Eldar, but mostly Tyranids I had no idea if we'd ever again see plasic Epic models available new back then.

I never knew they did that. I burn with jealousy (again). I did manage to pick up 5 sprues worth of tyranid plastics for under £20 a couple of nights ago on ebay - it didn't appear under the"Epic" search for some reason...

What annoyed me was the whole Epic "Armageddon" theme. No reason to release Tyranids from the start, and it was pretty obvious they weren't going to add them unless the game really took off. We did get some new Eldar, at least

To be honest by the time E:A came out epic had reached an all time low in terms of players due to EW40K, and because of the time game between Epic 2nd ed and E:A the price hikes had priced most other people out. I still think E:A is their most affordable large scale wargame. As to only releasing a few of the races, well GW base what they release on sales figures, so unless it sell they don't release it - unfortunately this is a vicious circle that means anything not in production doesn't sell, and thus won't be (re)released unless there is massive demand.

[AndrewGPaul]

Epic fever is sweeping our games club at the moment, and after digging through the Wardrobe, I'm rather surprised at how much stuff I have; Tyranids (including 2 Dominatrices, a Heirophant and 3 Heirodules), Imperial Guard, Space Marines (with four Thunderhawks and a Landing Craft), Eldar (mostly 2nd edition vintage, but with a decent collection of Knights) and Titans (seven Warlords, four Reavers, four Warhounds and an Imperator). I've even got a few Squats, although the Colossus is missing the missile ramps from the sides.

[zoggin-eck]

I never knew they did that. I burn with jealousy (again). I did manage to pick up 5 sprues worth of tyranid plastics for under £20 a couple of nights ago on ebay - it didn't appear under the"Epic" search for some reason...

Haha, I bought so many sprues that day. If I remember, it worked out to about $4.50 Australian a sprue (would be better at today's rates!) but we all have those little hobby "wins" over the years. They make up for all those "at a car boot/garage sale with no cash so run and find ATM, come back and they've already sold" type moments. One day, in all honesty, I spotted the Heroquest Ogre expansion boxed set in the window of a charity store. As I pointed it out to my girlfriend, saying how I never find anything cool like that in those stores, the shop assistant lifted it up and sold it right then! If only...

Hmm... did the Armageddon theme come first? Or did they decide to set it on Armageddon because they only had the resources to do Imperials and Orks initially?

Yeah, it would make sense. I think they were right with Battlefleet Gothic focusing on a certain time and place, branching out later as the range grew. I'm happy they did a pretty good job on the Imperials and Orks rather than a poor job of every army.

To be honest, a proper setting often makes the game. Necromunda is cool partly because of the setting (even if my own collection is just random models, rather than the existing gangs!) and Inquisitor is so much better for being just about Inquisitors and the like, (mostly!) avoiding the temptation to just do 54mm 40k models.

As for anything missing from the Guard army, fliers perhaps? There's a lot of models you could proxy as Imp. aircraft. I must admit that we often used to play "with or without" fliers, since we didn't own models for each army, and it felt a bit unfair if one army had heaps and the other none.

Ratlings to gretchin is a cool idea for those who don't want space hobbits, might have to try it.

[MarkNorfolk]

Hmm... did the Armageddon theme come first? Or did they decide to set it on Armageddon because they only had the resources to do Imperials and Orks initially?

I also have a tank detachment planned, but I don't have the right models yet (I've been proxying up till now). I've got three Hellhounds and a third Demolisher available, but I need some actual Leman Russes. Apart from citruswolfies, I think I need a few Chimeras to give the infantry more mobility. Is there anything else obviously missing that you'd recommend? Sentinels? Griffons? Twelve Imperator Titans?

Also, the cost for all the command squads seems excessive (since you need 1 command for every 3 squads you take). Was there anything in Firepower mag about that? I'm sure I read about it somewhere on the net...

I'd say the artillery detachment is a little light, but I suppose it depends on how big your targets are going to be. (Plus my opinion may be skewed by my using Manticores as Seige Artillery and I like large formations generally). Without a tank company a titan is a must (and it is Epic after all - you must have a titan). I'd push the boat out for a Warlord but a Reaver is good choice for the points. Another way to reach out and touch someone is with flyers.

The high costof IG command was a design decision to offset the the FP of the armour but Firepower #1 does have some alternative IG Infantry detachments which allow more infantry and/or reflect the 40K codex of the time.

As to the Armageddon theme - JJ's feeling was that the game would have sold better if the background focused on a particular campaign, despite the streamlined mechanics (as seen with BFG) hence the specific Chapter, Regiment and Ork Horde in the E:A rulebook. (My inner cynic is telling me that this was a gloss over the fact they only had to playtest three army lists).

Cheers
Mark

[Zenithfleet]

Haha, I bought so many sprues that day. If I remember, it worked out to about $4.50 Australian a sprue (would be better at today's rates!) but we all have those little hobby "wins" over the years. They make up for all those "at a car boot/garage sale with no cash so run and find ATM, come back and they've already sold" type moments. One day, in all honesty, I spotted the Heroquest Ogre expansion boxed set in the window of a charity store. As I pointed it out to my girlfriend, saying how I never find anything cool like that in those stores, the shop assistant lifted it up and sold it right then! If only...

In that case I can put aside my envy at your Tyranid ownerage, because I have Ogre Horde Got it for my birthday long long ago. And was disappointed because I'd wanted Return of the Witch Lord. There's no pleasing some people.

As for anything missing from the Guard army, fliers perhaps? There's a lot of models you could proxy as Imp. aircraft. I must admit that we often used to play "with or without" fliers, since we didn't own models for each army, and it felt a bit unfair if one army had heaps and the other none.

Actually I do have three Thunderbolts that came with the box, but it'll be a while before they're ready to use - I don't want to stick them on flying stands until they're painted... Playing with/without fliers sounds like a good house rule (since you'd presumably need flak units on both sides too, otherwise it'd be a bit unfair.)

Ratlings to gretchin is a cool idea for those who don't want space hobbits, might have to try it.

Snotlings actually - they're a lot smaller than the plastic grots. I just wanted a bit of ammo for the shokk attack guns.

I'd say the artillery detachment is a little light, but I suppose it depends on how big your targets are going to be. (Plus my opinion may be skewed by my using Manticores as Seige Artillery and I like large formations generally). Without a tank company a titan is a must (and it is Epic after all - you must have a titan). I'd push the boat out for a Warlord but a Reaver is good choice for the points. Another way to reach out and touch someone is with flyers.

Yeah, everything's a bit limited at the moment since I only have what came with the ebay box. Hang on - aren't Manticores siege artillery anyway? (I do find it a bit hard to remember the distinction, since apparently 'heavy artillery' is not in fact heavier than 'siege artillery'...)

There will be a Titan, and it will be a Reaver, and it will be for my Chaos army Always loved that model, and they look quite affordable secondhand. Other Titans will have to wait for a bit - I'm on a budget (and trying to build five armies at once isn't helping).

Actually I think the most pressing need is vehicles and a big stompy fella of some description for the Orks - they're almost entirely footsloggers, with just five Battlewagons (scratch-built) and three Battle Fortresses (ditto) to hitch a lift on. The Epic 3rd ed wagonz seem to be a bit scarce on ebay, but I'm not too picky. (EDIT: Oops, I was searching for 'battlewagons' when I should have just been searching 'orks' - so many different names for the things!) If only I could find a Gargant model I actually liked.

I'm also not quite sure I've got the hang of how Infiltrators work. Am I right in thinking that if they're broken in a combat or firefight while beyond the 30cm command range, they're destroyed, but their parent detachment is unaffected (i.e. not broken)?

[MarkNorfolk]

My rules are tucked away in the garage at the moment and I can't remember about infiltrators. Orks also travelled around in Trukks so that might be a search option.

Cheers
Mark

[Zenithfleet]

Well, I was hoping to have another battle report or two by now, but the opposing forces were delayed in the warp. I guess that means an auto-win to me (It's about the only way I'll ever actually win )

Have been busy getting some objective markers, Epic-scale hills and itty bitty woods ready. Plus roads made from rulers. And a river! Never had a river before.

This risks turning into a project log, so I reckon I'd better ask a question quick like. Here we go: Besides the five army lists in the Armies Book, what other armies or variant detachments were created for Epic 40K? I know the Tau had a list in Epic 40,000 Magazine, and there's some variant Space Marine lists in WD 210. Was there anything else? Necrons in their pre-Codex days? Genestealer Cults? (I reckon the latter would be easy to do using the Chaos Cultist detachment - just give 'em some Stealers as Support and count the Magus as... er... a Magus.)

Oh, and to fans of Epic 40K - what do you think are the flaws in this edition? Anything you like to house-rule? (Snap-fire annoyed me from the moment I read about it in the rulebook, for instance.)

[MarkNorfolk]

Off the top of my head:
In Firepower:
Varient IG Infantry detachments
Squat detachments
Imperial Knight household
Ordo Malleus Detachment

An E:40k datasheet for the Chaos Abominatus turned up in the E:40k magazine. It was all a bit early for the Necrons beyond the Chaos Android models....

Cheers
Mark

Cheers
Mark

[Hedgehobbit]

Oh, and to fans of Epic 40K - what do you think are the flaws in this edition? Anything you like to house-rule? (Snap-fire annoyed me from the moment I read about it in the rulebook, for instance.)

I haven't played in a while but here's my house rules. The most significant one is about anti-tank. I don't use the +5 pts fix from the magazine because that didn't address the main problem I had which was that a detachment of Land Raider will destroy another identical detachment in one shot.

Anti-tank shots
Anti-tank shots are treated just like normal Firepower and go through the Firepower table just like normal shots. After rolling, those anti-tank shots are allocated along with the normal firepower. I use white dice for normal firepower and red dice for anti-tank firepower. Allocate front to back like normal with the shooting player picking whether to use a normal firepower die or an anti-tank die for each target (hint: use anti-tank for all the armor 6 targets). Also, if you run out of regular firepower hits (or never had any) you can decide to skip over infantry to hit vehicles but, if you do so, you have to apply hits to all vehicles not just some of them.

Blast markers and morale
Rather than have blast markers reduce firepower or cancel super heavy weapons one-at-a-time replace all those rules with the following:

If a detachment has more blast markers than ½ of its number of units (or DC), then the detachment is considered to be Suppressed and they get a one column shift to the right when shooting. If a detachment has more blast markers than total units (or DC), it is Disrupted and gets a two column shift.

In addition, a Suppressed detachment gets a -1 penalty to Assault and Firefight die rolls. Disrupted detachments get a -2 penalty. Note that I’m using negative numbers on purpose to make battles between two damaged detachments less lethal. These penalties replace the ones for having Blast Markers on the Assault/Firefight charts.

I don't use breaking and Leadership tests because they don’t scale well with detachment sizes and because there are already enough penalties from blast markers. Detachments still have to retreat from lost assaults and firefights but aren’t broken. Detachments that are Stubborn can reroll the die to remove blast makers in the rally phase.


The only change I've made to the army lists (other than add a few extra titan weapons) is to fix the Imperial Guard infantry detachment. Command squads cost 7 points each and one must be designated the HQ at +25 points. This makes them equal to every other detachment in the game. This was Detachment #1 from Firepower issue 3. I do kinda like detachment #2 as well. Therefore it was detachment #3 that actually won the voting contest IIRC.


The snap-fire rules may sound annoying but they seldom actually come up in play unless you want to them to. We warn out opponents if they try to get too close.


Finally, there is a dark eldar army list in one of the Epic 40,000 magazines but it is very outdated.

[Zenithfleet]

I haven't played in a while but here's my house rules.

Thanks Hedgehobbit - those are intriguing I'll keep them in mind.

I think I've seen you post those elsewhere - on Taccoms maybe? I did a heck of a lot of random net browsing while deciding whether or not to get into Epic, so it's all jumbled up in my head...

The column shift idea sounds vaguely Battlefleet Gothic-ish (which I've heard uses the same game engine as E40K, yes?)

Just to be dense - when you say breaking and leadership tests don't scale well, what do you find goes wrong with big/small detachments?

Also, if nobody's broken after retreating, how do you handle the Tyranid Synapse effect (which I think does the same thing)? Does that give the nids some other bonus instead?

[Zenithfleet]

On another note (therefore new post) - a couple of very basic noobish rules questions:

What's the logic behind placing blast markers before you modify Firepower due to assault orders / blast markers on the firing detachment / etc? Seems a bit odd that you still cause just as much disruption to the enemy even when your shooting ability is reduced...

Disrupt weapons: The rules say they place a blast marker if you get a 4, 5 or 6, in addition to any other blasts they would normally place. Does this count as a 'hit' for the purposes of the super heavy weapons table? (i.e. if you have 4 disrupt weapons firing they place 1 blast marker, plus an extra one for every 4+ they roll... while firing just 1 disrupt weapon would either place no blast markers, or 2 if they rolled a 4+ to hit.)

Mega-cannon: "Each Mega-cannon attack places one Blast marker on the target detachment in addition to any other Blast markers that would normally be placed." (p34) What counts as an 'attack'? Is it a use of the weapon, or a roll to hit? (i.e. do you get only one bonus Blast marker when you use a Mega-cannon no matter how many units are under the template? Or do you get a bonus Blast marker for every unit you roll to hit?)

EDIT: I originally typed 'shot' instead of 'use of the weapon', but just to make things more confusing, I've seen the term 'shot' used elsewhere meaning 'roll to hit' instead. (e.g. the White Dwarf suggestion that vortex missiles should do D6 Death Ray shots rather than hits.)

Barrages and heavy barrages: This is more of a house rule, but should these get any bonus when fired at war engines? We found it a bit odd that firing Basilisks at Gargants only gave 1 Firepower per template, because there's only one unit under the template. Surely sugh a huge target would be hard to miss and have several vulnerable areas to hit, just like firing at a bunch of infantry or tanks? (Maybe you could count Damage Capacity as the number of units?)

And finally a really, really, super-ultra-basic rule that I couldn't actually find in the rulebook, got horribly confused about during the practice game, and finally tracked down in the WD 208 battle report: When you fire at a detachment partly in cover and partly in the open, you can choose whether to fire at the whole detachment or only at the units in the open. If you choose to fire at the whole detachment, then you must use the 'in cover' column on the Firepower table for the whole detachment - and the hits can be allocated to any unit - yes?

(I know the above is obvious, but I found the wording on p19 of the rulebook a bit obscure, so I just want to be absolutely sure. Partly my confusion was caused by the fact that detachments can split their fire between several enemy detachments. We fell into the trap of thinking they could therefore also split their fire against a single enemy detachment if some of it was in cover and some not. "I'll fire four of my guys at the ones in the open and six of my guys against the ones in cover".)

EDIT 2: Whoops, thought of another one! The rulebook says line of fire isn't blocked by "other units" (p18). Does this include enemy units? Can you fire through an enemy detachment to hit a target on the far side?
This situation came up in our first game (Gogard's Last Stand scenario). I found myself in range of a bunker objective, but there was an IG detachment between me and the bunker. Since the bunker model we were using was very tall (it was a comms dish on top of a tower), I wondered if I could fire through (or over) the Imperials to hit it. We decided no since it seemed a bit silly and abusable, but I can't find a specific ruling.

[MarkNorfolk]

I pretty much play it out of the box (plus amendments from Firepower). Opponents are few and far between so 'house rules' just make things more awkward. I think it works just fine.

I believe the scaling problem with Leadership is that a 30-unit detachment is just as paralysed as a 5-unit detachment as a Leadership test is just rolling over how many blast markers they have if they wish to move. On one hand you could say that a large detachment would need more scared members to be locked in place. On the other hand you could say it doesn't matter how many people are petrified with fear - as long as some are the detachment sats put! It's a draw back to large formations.

Blast markers before FP modifications: I guess it's a quantity issue rather than quality. If your being shot at you take cover - you don't wait to see if you've been missed. There isn't extra BMs if the attacker is on Overwatch.

Disrupt: that's right.

Mega-cannon: Good old GW and their vague rules, but it was clarified in a Firepower Q&A. Each Mega-cannon fired is one attack. So if your Titan was firing 2 Mega-cannon it would be +2 BM.

Barrages: a reasonable arguement....but one could argue that area effect weaponary aren't the best for busting open large super-armoured units. Do note that you get to use a more advantageous column when fireing at war engines and that Eldar holo-fields don't work against barrage templates.

Cover: WD 208 has it right.

Firing through units: I had to look this up....the basic rule is any unit does not block line of fire. (Bit of a stretch where gargants are concerned - but I guess if a gargant is that close you should be shooting the gargant)!

Cheers
Mark

[Zenithfleet]

Thanks Mark, that's pretty darn comprehensive

I'd forgotten about the different column for war engines - and the fact that Overwatch doesn't improve your blast-marker placement, so logically assaulting won't affect it either. Makes more sense to me now

It'll be a while before we use many house rules apart from the ones in the Firepower mags (which I'll hopefully manage to get hold of soonish). We need to actually get the rules straight before we start messing with them...

One the subject of Gargants - do people have a particular favourite? I've struggled to find a model I like (at least judging by photos). Only this one really appeals to me. Even if it does seem to be wearing a bra.

[MarkNorfolk]

That's my favourite too - there are a few head and weapon ootions to vary the flavour a bit, although the 'snappa' option for the belly mount isn't covered by E:40k. The Slasha and the Mek-boy Gargants aren't as impressive. My own Great Gargant is the current, squared-off version. I loved gargants in 1st/2nd edition. They took ages to blow up and instead just got worse at shooting as they became more and more on fire. That is still kind of reflected in the E:40k crit chart......

It's getting me nostalgic for my early games of Epic: 10,000 pointers with many titan-class engines, hordes and hordes of troops.......lots of people died in those games.

Cheers
Mark

[Hedgehobbit]

The column shift idea sounds vaguely Battlefleet Gothic-ish (which I've heard uses the same game engine as E40K, yes?)

Battlefleet Gothic uses the firepower table from Epic and has column shifts for range and things. But it's a common boardgame rule. I ended up extending the Epic firepower table a couple columns to the right (although I can't find my original word file where I did this)

Just to be dense - when you say breaking and leadership tests don't scale well, what do you find goes wrong with big/small detachments?

Rolling over the number of Blast Markers is fine for smaller detachments but my friend likes to have huge ork detachments because I have tons of boyz and battlewagons from the second edition boxed sets. Once a detachment gets 6 or more blast markers it's hardly ever making a leadership test. An ork warband detachment can have 40 boyz stands and 30 battlewagon. There's no reason to even try to build detachments of that size if the whole can be shut down by 6 blast markers.

What I've found is that when a detachment gets tons of blast markers, the player will normally pull them out of the line to somewhere safer to regroup. This seems much more natural and more like what a battlefield commander would actually be doing. I'm still like to come up with some sort of compromise. My posts on taccomm mentioned some ideas I had such as giving a detachment a "leadership" value and rolling 1d6 vs the leadership per 5 units in the detachment for blast marker removal. My goal is to have a game that smoothly scales from detachments of 5 units to detachments of 50 units. So that both small and large battles can have the same number of detachments which will give you tactical depth in small games without large games taking forever. That's my dream anyway.

Also, if nobody's broken after retreating, how do you handle the Tyranid Synapse effect (which I think does the same thing)? Does that give the nids some other bonus instead?

No one I play with has tyranids. Honestly, I'm not even sure how they work.

It's kinda sad that you've heard of my and seen my posts. Epic 40k is probably the 4th or 5th game in terms of the amount I play it. There is just so little Epic 40k talk on the net which is a shame because it's a good little game.

[Zenithfleet]

Rolling over the number of Blast Markers is fine for smaller detachments but my friend likes to have huge ork detachments because I have tons of boyz and battlewagons from the second edition boxed sets. Once a detachment gets 6 or more blast markers it's hardly ever making a leadership test. An ork warband detachment can have 40 boyz stands and 30 battlewagon. There's no reason to even try to build detachments of that size if the whole can be shut down by 6 blast markers.

Wouldn't detachments of that size be a bit unwieldy, though? You could only give them one order at once, for instance. I think my first instinct would be to make several smaller detachments so they'd be more flexible. And I can picture Orks in particular struggling to coordinate such a huge force with only one warboss. "Oi! Stop messin' about over dere!" *grabs megaphone squig* "IT'S JUST A BIT OF PUNY HUMIE DAKKA YA IDIOTS! DA ENEMY'S DAT WAY!"

I gather you've found that taking lots of smaller detachments slows the game down, though, so I see where you're coming from.

It does seem strange that there's a +1 bonus for being 15 units or bigger, but no further bonuses for larger detachments. If I end up making gigantic detachments, I might try adding more tiered bonuses (e.g. +2 for being 30 units or bigger), though I'm not sure exactly what values they should be.

What I've found is that when a detachment gets tons of blast markers, the player will normally pull them out of the line to somewhere safer to regroup. This seems much more natural and more like what a battlefield commander would actually be doing.

Fair enough, but I thought one of the concepts behind blast markers was that they represented disruption to the chain of command. Detachments under fire not doing what you want them to, in other words (like ducking and covering when you'd much rather pull them out to safety).

Or am I getting E40K mixed up with Warmaster now?

No one I play with has tyranids. Honestly, I'm not even sure how they work.

Tyranid detachments (swarms) must include Synapse creatures like Warrior stands or Hive Tyrants. As long as the swarm includes at least one Synapse creature, it ignores Leadership tests and doesn't break when it's forced to retreat. Once all the Synapse beasties are dead, the swarm behaves like any other detachment. Or so the Armies book tells me. It'll be a while before I get to try them out...

Also, they apparently never use objectives no matter what the scenario - they just have to slaughter as much as they can. (Bonus morale points for wiping out enemy detachments.)

It's kinda sad that you've heard of my and seen my posts. Epic 40k is probably the 4th or 5th game in terms of the amount I play it. There is just so little Epic 40k talk on the net which is a shame because it's a good little game.

Yeah, info has been a bit scarce. I keep stumbling back onto the same old posts and discussions...

Does anyone know of any interviews with Jervis/Andy/Gav about E40K's woes? Possibly there's stuff in Firepower/Epic 40K Magazine, though I can understand if they wouldn't want to openly discuss/admit a commercial failure in a GW publication! I've read they consider it one of the best rulesets they ever did, but I don't know where that morsel of hearsay comes from.

[MarkNorfolk]

I feel the unwieldiness of 'super-large' detatchments, combined with a limit on the morale bonus is an acceptable cost to avoid an 'indestructable' detachment. Plus the fact that each detachment reduces it's blast markers by 1 to 5 in the end phase would mean that if you failed a Leadership test you must have had a fair few Blast Markers to start with (or very unlucky but then, we are gaming with d6s).

Jervis waxed lyrical on his disappointment on E:40k's lack of success in issue #1 of the Epic:40,000 Magazine, the successor to Firepower (and before the merging into Fanatic Magazine). It was seeing BFG's success with a very similar design that lead him to expand the mechanics a little and focus the background on a particular campaign....but by then GW was paring down the non-core games to the bone.

Cheers
Mark