I missed Epic when it came out but now I am becoming interested in it and I'm looking for some advice on which version of the rules to play.

A friend has a bunch of Epic figures which are part of the "Space Marine" boxed set. We had a game using these rules and although they were fun there are some broken bits in the rules. He used to play a lot but that was my first Epic game EVER! They were lots of fun and remind me of 40K RT with was fun and had some silly stuff in it.

I suggested that we try some newer versions of the rules and he was partially keen. So my question is which version of Epic to try that is more balanced but is still fun and has some of the wacky units like Weirdboy towers. Another appeal of the SM rules was the simplicity so that is an interest.

Cheers
Kieran

_________________
My 6mm Wargaming site http://6mm.wargaming.info

Someone will be along to elaborate (or possibly outright contradict me) but for now:

If you like:
- simplicity and little maneuver, with heavy abstraction in the rules but more 'old-style' comedy/silliness in the units - go with Space Marine (or Net Epic).

- much more complexity, a game about maneuver with a few sometimes illogical quirks that can be exploited by very skilled/competitive players - Epic Armageddon/NetEA.

- the version nobody speaks of - Epic 40,000.

Whichever edition you ultimately choose, I hope you stick with it. Epic scale battles are a blast.

Thanks for the info. It looks like i posted it in the wrong forum so I will repost if on the Netepic one

_________________
My 6mm Wargaming site http://6mm.wargaming.info

Ah I knew it more negative press for Epic 40,000 I was expecting that a game sadly underestimated in my view.

Most people here play Epic Armageddon that's the real focus here but not everyone by any means it's best to take a look at all versions of the game and then make an informed decision based on what suits you as a rules set.

_________________
Vanguard Miniatures

Link, http://vanguardminiatures.co.uk/

Stockist of:

Vanguard Miniatures
BattleGroup Helios
Onslaught Miniatures
Pyrkol Gaming Markers
Gregster's Lab
Microworld Games
Troublemaker Games

I have to agree, EA is a fine set of rules, one of the best around mechanically imo, but there is nothing stopping you trying out all the rules and seeing which you like best.... All versions have merits

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Both areas of the forum are for different versions of the game so probably neither is better than the other.

There was a discussion on this topic not so long ago so you could dig that up maybe. But my 2p:

Can't really comment on 1st ed or 2nd ed or NetEpic as not played them, I know they have their issues.

3rd edition (Epic 40k) is very abstract, similar to Battlefleet Gothic (most units' weapons abstracted to firepower values) but is much quicker to play and therefore allows for truly epic games. It was also a very strategic and tactical game compared to the versions that came before it. The trade-off is a significant reduction in the character of the units. It's no longer of the scale of individual weapons on individual tanks firing independently.

Epic Armageddon (4th edition) sought to strike a balance between the tactical and strategic gameplay of 3rd and the greater detail and flavour of previous editions. It definitely achieves that, which is to say the unit flavour is back and every army plays in a satisfyingly sifferent way, with weapons having their own profiles, yet the game is therefore slightly more complex and thus armies tend to be smaller than 3rd edition. It is by far the most balanced and popular edition today. Since it is more heavily played its idiosyncrasies and occasional quirks are more widely known. Some may be put off by the tournament army list mechanics (you don't have to use them but almost everyone does). These offer fairly strictly constrained formations, which is good for tournament balance but some would prefer more freedom to mix together unit types - like mini 40K armies in a single formation.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Epic 40k is the best of the Epic rules, but never got a chance because all the old Epic players freaked out with the abstractions. I would play that myself, but EA is the king in New England, so I play that. That being said, EA is a very good set of rules. Your milage may very of course. I really enjoy both Epic 40K and Battlefleet Gothic. Gothic is the only game I can get my son to play (I have great hope for Halo Ground Command).

_________________
Regards,
Mike

Cool another Epic 40k fan excellent, in my eyes E40k was indeed the best set of epic rules created a game designed for literally epic sized battles focusing the players on being generals not captains. Never understood why it has this reputation for being too abstact I mean battlefleet gothic was accepted without anyone batting an eyelid and that is basically E40k with huge multi kilometre long mega starships. How can firepower and lances (anti tank) be universallly accepted for these gigantic ships but not for a little tank. It's always perplexed me as to this situation I mean what's the difference.

One point of firepower means one roll of the dice how is that less detailed than 5+ to hit in EA it's the same thing in my mind. Messing around shooting individual weapons on a tank is micro management that is not needed at this scale the focus should be on the battlegroup/formation as a whole not individual units.

Love Epic 40.000 and Battlefleet Gothic brilliant games in my view the later accepted without question the former shunned when basically they are the same game but with different scaled models.

But there you go lifes funny that way.

All IMHO of course.

_________________
Vanguard Miniatures

Link, http://vanguardminiatures.co.uk/

Stockist of:

Vanguard Miniatures
BattleGroup Helios
Onslaught Miniatures
Pyrkol Gaming Markers
Gregster's Lab
Microworld Games
Troublemaker Games

I'll have to dig out the Epic 40k rules and have another look. Did not get much chance to get involved at the time it was released as I was doing my junior doctor house jobs (back in the days of 100 hour weeks).

I agree with what MD says, 3rd ed was under appreciated. The core mechanics are really solid, allow for large battles and allows the game to focus on the manoeuvre rather than micromanage, and the blast marker/suppression rules are still far better. That said, i think personally EA pushed some of the key ideas from 3rd to fruition for example alternating activation, scouting, at/ap fire split, air combat (though certainly not perfect in ea!) making for a better game. Both could do with a 2nd edition.

Its been a couple of decades since i played it, but while innovative at the time, SM2 feels its age now.

But at the end of the day, play whatever you can get games of - theres not enough players to be too picky any more ! :-) They all have their merits.


Sent from my mobile using Tapatalk

I dont think anyone has anything against the epic 40k game, it is simply very different to the edition that came before so it's only natural that people would not switch to it. BFG came a very long time after any previous incarnation so it just wasn't in the same boat. I'm not convinced that BFG had more players than E40k at the time, it's just that a lot of people played space marine and lots of them did not make the switch.

MD, it seems odd to me that you wouldn't accept that it is more abstract than other editions though (including EA). Of course it is - you give some good examples yourself - the difference between individual weapons each with different to hit rolls and different targets is one man's needless micromanagement and another man's detail. Those weapons are all abstracted to a single firepower value in E40K.

I never played 2nd ed so I have no issue with E40k at all, I thought it was extremely well designed and the "thinking man's game" whereas 2nd ed was for people who couldn't let go of 40K. I played it a lot in my late teens and to be honest looked down on people who didn't like it BFG I also thought had great mechanics, being based on E40K, and it would clearly be silly to try to model every single weapon at that scale (like representing every tank in a planetary scale ground war game) so was really well suited.

When 4th ed was announced as a way to try to "address the concerns of old players" I thought it was likely to be a backwards step. In the end though I thought they did a good job, and I didn't know that epic needed the additional "flavour" it brought until it came along. It sacrificed the scale of E40k which is a loss but in return the slightly more detail in the mechanics means that there is greater variety in the way units, formations and armies behave on the tabletop, whilst still being a very strategic and tactical game. There are some quirks, but IMO far less than E40K had (snap fire anyone?).

So yeah, IMO both 3rd and 4th are great games, for some of the same and some different reasons.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I loved all three versions (never played 1st). But each seemed flawed to me, showing typical lack of competitive play testing by GW. Each has been improved though (removing a lot of those balance issues) since the original books were released by the players and each still has its merits. Plenty has been written on the subject.

Sorry I wasn't clear that I actually like the abstraction of Epic 40K. What I like about it is that you can focus on the strategy and not get bogged down in the tactics (micromanagement as you say).

Epic EA is a very good game and I can play it until the cows come home. Fun, with some of the good bits of Epic 40k. The stuff that give it is character is also it weakness. Wander through the threads on Blood Angels and Ulthwé Eldar to see what I mean. At this scale the item that give folks endless pain should not be that consuming.

I was quite happy with the Blood Angles list from 2014, but it keeps changing because of the small details folks focus on. Not even sure what list to play right now. At the end of the day, if you throw Blood Angels or Ultra Marines at a planet are the results really that different for an Epic scale game?

_________________
Regards,
Mike

Which version of Space Marine are you talking about? The one with the Dark Angels on the cover that is set in the Horus Heresy (v1), or the one with the Ultramarines on the cover that came with Space Marines, Orks, and Eldar (v2)?

I love both of those games, and while there is a lot of game in either box, as well as their sister games Adeptus Titanicus (for v1) and Titan Legions (for v2), it could take some serious investment in time and cash to hunt down things like the Codex Titanicus and White Dwarf articles for v1, or the expansion sets for v2, let alone whatever minis you like, and in the case of v2, the strict detachment sizes.

Epic 40,000 is a pretty impressive box set. Its going to cost you some money finding a complete one on Ebay, but you'll get a ton of gaming out of that box set. It includes thorough rules and army lists for the Space Marines and Imperial Guard, Eldar, Orks, Chaos, and Tyranids. The minis that came in the set were awesome, but the other models released separately are the best they ever made for Epic. You'll have enough in that box set to play Epic for years.

One of the things holding me back about recommending EA is that besides the main rulebook and Swordwind book, which combined don't include a lot of army variety, you're going to have to make do with a lot of PDFs. Works for many people, but I really prefer the color, the art, and fluff that goes along with owning proper rulebooks. They just inspire me more.

As far as Epic 40k gameplay, I understand and do agree with most of the comments above, and do appreciate it for what it is, but at the same time, there are rarely those 'hero' moments where you can identify a particular unit achieving something awesome, which I have always loved as its forges a cool little narrative. I understand that at this scale some players feel that the focus should be on tactics, but I am a believer in both.

Oh something nice about Epic 40k (3rd edition) was how you had tons of freedom to grab any units and number of of them to build up your detachments. 2nd edition/NetEpic and 4th are far more rigid in their army construction in having X number of these units and allowing only certain numbers of particular units/quantities to be added. If you have random models and/or a less virile collection, it can make for a great savings on your wallet and ease gathering a playable set of models. Nothing prevents you doing that in the other systems, buy you have to do the effort to make that work yourself.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!