Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 2 of 2
  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

CS on EA
Moscovian
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 5:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
As for the miniatures, what is the worst case scenario? That GW withdraw all minis? In this case, we play with what we have available, and the lists encompass the other manufacturers as the 'intro armies'. Would this be so terrible?


Whether we like it or not, I think all of us can agree that the availability of the models is clearly out of our hands.  It is time to move from discussion to action, CS.  Mark's handbook met with skepticism originally but was met with praises later on.  The same will happen with this.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
blackhorizon
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:40 pm
Posts: 2842
Location: Netherlands
One side question, is it me or is Epic the only game with this 'problem'? I don't know about Inquisitor, Mordheim and others but I haven't read on any board a Battlefleet Gothic related scenario, or even talks about the 'plug-out-of-it'. Yes, some posts in a while but Epic, say TacCom, seems the most advanced SG in terms of this issue. Or am I seeing this wrong?

Do BFG players care less?
Epic does not have all miniatures for all armies, is that the reason of it?
Is it the Epic Army Champion system?

I'm just wondering on the difference?

_________________
Light at the Horizon.

Warp Rift
Project Distant Darkness
Eldar MMS

GothiComp Hall of Fame
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=19176
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dwarf Supreme
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: Canton, CT, USA
You might be mad, CS, but you're hardly alone.  :D

Here are my thoughts:

1. Does Epic need saving?

Given GW's current lack of support, the obvious answer is "Yes". However, from another viewpoint, epic doesn't need saving, because there are currently many active players even with Epic's current state.

2. Can we save Epic?

Yes, just like NetEpic saved SM/TL (albeit with some major rules rewrites) we can save E:A, but it would be hard to recruit new players without GW carrying minis.

3. Should we save Epic?

In may ways I agree with Primarch's sentiment that the answer is "No". Epic has had a great run, but all good things must come to an end and it's time to move on to new systems, like DRM and EW. Quite frankly, GW doesn't deserve our loyalty. I might not be able to invest in EW and DRM to the same level as I did with Epic, but the thought of not just one, but two companies producing new 6mm minis is very exciting, especially since both companies actually seem to care about their customers.

On the other hand, given how much I how much money and time I've invested in Epic, I have every intention of still playing, even if it's only me and a few other players. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm way beyond needing GW's support to maintain my enthusiasm for Epic. I can honestly say that it wouldn't bother me if I never bought another Epic mini. Lord knows I have enough already!  :p




_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:36 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(blackhorizon @ Feb. 18 2008,15:19)
QUOTE
One side question, is it me or is Epic the only game with this 'problem'? I don't know about Inquisitor, Mordheim and others but I haven't read on any board a Battlefleet Gothic related scenario, or even talks about the 'plug-out-of-it'. Yes, some posts in a while but Epic, say TacCom, seems the most advanced SG in terms of this issue. Or am I seeing this wrong?

Do BFG players care less?
Epic does not have all miniatures for all armies, is that the reason of it?
Is it the Epic Army Champion system?

I'm just wondering on the difference?

Hi!

The "main" difference is all those other games is that unlike epic, those game are at the end of the FIRST run, that and they don't have a "history".

Its not that they don't care, but they don't have nearly 19 years of history to draw upon. Some may even think (naively) that their games will continue in some form, or maybe the model will remain available in some (albeit small and incomplete) form. Its easy to hope when there isn't a long dismal history behind your game.

Of course epic has a long sad history in the last 12 years of commercial failures and lack of support.

We complain because "WE KNOW", its happened to us before.

That is the principal difference.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:54 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(CyberShadow @ Feb. 18 2008,10:47)
QUOTE

This is something that concerned me for a while. I also feel that there will not be another Epic version - not necessarily because GW wont want to revive it, but simply because the players will not trust it.

That said, I started to think about the consequence of this. For me, if GW dropped Epic tomorrow, I would continue to play, and continue to want to talk about the game. That in itself is a certain type of development, even without any structure in place.


Hi!

Unfortunately true. Ironically for GW, a company that rabidly like to protects its "valuable" IP, it may have done irreparable harm to it in anything regarding epic. Its horrible support of EA has "tainted" any good will for the foreseeable future. As you state "not to be trusted" will be the label the game will forever carry as long as it remains under the GW logo.

As to the second, no doubt all of us will continue to play epic, well, forever!! We will discuss it on these forums, also, for as long as it exists (hopefully forever too!  :)  ).

The thing is how much time and effort to put into something that GW will NEVER appreciate or care. I'm sorry for being such a sad sap. Anytime I right abut these things I think for 10-15 minutes whether I should say or write anything at all. It all comes out so sour, bitter and utterly lacking in hope.

But the fact beyond all else is that GW DOES NOT CARE. Its not the usual bitterboy vitrol. I left that behind years ago. Actually when I say or write it its without any passion, which is the scary part. I can't be enthused about supporting epic as we know it, because GW as we know it won't support it... AT ALL.

Whatever people decide to do from here on out, I would say, do it for yourself. Not for the "gaming community", not for EA, and certainly not for GW.

For YOU, because you deem it fun, entertaining and fulfilling.

If others decide to join in and find it fulfilling, then that a bonus.

Don't do it because "maybe" the company that abandons it will "come around".

In the end any hobby is about the self satisfaction it brings.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Bear in mind that games like mordheim and necromunda wouldn't actually be all that affected if the miniature ranges were cancelled - it's perfectly possible to play them with 40k/fantasy figures.

Epic however would be crippled by it.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(zombocom @ Feb. 18 2008,18:57)
QUOTE
Bear in mind that games like mordheim and necromunda wouldn't actually be all that affected if the miniature ranges were cancelled - it's perfectly possible to play them with 40k/fantasy figures.

Epic however would be crippled by it.

Hi!

Excellent point!

I hadn't thought about that.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Warmaster would likely survive happily too, as there are many 10mm fantasy manufacturers that make direct proxies.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 18 2008,19:01)
QUOTE
Warmaster would likely survive happily too, as there are many 10mm fantasy manufacturers that make direct proxies.

Hi!

Great points all!

I guess that really means epic situation IS unique.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:13 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Not quite unique, BFG is in a similar situation (though the rules system could easily work with actual ship models...)

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 9:39 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Having mulled this over, I have to say I'm basically with Primarch on this matter now.  I consider my time too valuable to spend much more of it on a project constrained by it's connection with GW.  

Nonetheless I do support everything Cybershadow proposes, to the extent that I'll aim to invest some minimal time into updating the EA Handbook with recommendations of Cybershadow's committee (or let them do it). In fact even if nothing comes of that I'll probably initiate a limited review myself in another year or so based on playtest feedback, and maybe also add a few more lists to the EA Handbook if they become ready.

If I have time to do anything substantial, in my own case I'd rather spend it working on a generic rule set, eg with Pixelgeek, Primarch and any others interested. Ie a ruleset that can be used for miniature ranges beyond just GW's - DRM, EW, Baccus etc.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Ginger
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:23 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
As I see it, there are essentially two (and a bit) options open to us. Few really expect GW to perform an about face, but "hope springs eternal" as dad would say. So, we can go down the route of a separate development, which will take time, effort and resources - and I doubt will see the light of day within 6 months if we start from scratch now. Alternatively we can carry on with E:A ourselves, which is essentially what CS is proposing (and which I definitely prefer). From what he presented, and taking the reaction to Markonz's handbook into account, I believe we can get organised, continue the maintenance and even development of the E:A rules (and army lists) to the point where we have a fully revised version in a relatively short period - certainly shorter than that needed to start from scratch (no offence PG)

But is there any reason why we should not do both??? Can we get some synergy here by working separately but in parallel?!

What I would really like to see is:-
1) Start creating a new generic ruleset
PG and team start work on their generic set - for example I have some ideas which may be of interest which include the use of other types of dice. But, they should be created in such a way as to make use of the current E:A resources (army lists, background, possibly even some elements of the rules etc). Note "making use" of may mean using some form of conversion mechanism (like the one GW failed to create to link W40K and Epic :p )

2) Continue E:A rules devemopment
CS and team organise the E:A rules and produce an "Authorised" set which the community recognises. This is done with the knowledge of GW through regular (if one-way) communication with the likes of JJ and Andy etc.

3) Crunch time
When appropriate we formally request GW/SG to host the new rules.
  • If they accept, all well and good. ?
    E:A rules/races etc continue. PG "rules" development is still viable as an alternative set with wider interests, but which can still follow and use E:A resources.
  • Should GW get grumpy and tell us to B*** off - we do just that!! :D ?
    We continue to develop / expand the new PG rule set. Work there is already maturing and we still have access to the stuff developed for both sets.
  • In the event of no response from GW,
    E:A work is hosted elsewhere, and probably diminishes over time, while the community migrates to the new PG set
Does this sound practical and viable? The intention is to get some movement going as many seem to want to do, but in the most constructive and effective way possible rather than having different groups fragmenting in different directions each claiming to be "right".

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:52 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

(Ginger @ Feb. 19 2008,09:23)
QUOTE
But is there any reason why we should not do both??? Can we get some synergy here by working separately but in parallel?!

Provided there are volunteers then there is no reason that both can't be worked on correct.

Unfortunately, my time is about to get shot to hell, so I will only be able to contribute to either of them in a small way for some time.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
blackhorizon
 Post subject: CS on EA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:40 pm
Posts: 2842
Location: Netherlands
thanks, I think! :)

_________________
Light at the Horizon.

Warp Rift
Project Distant Darkness
Eldar MMS

GothiComp Hall of Fame
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=19176
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 2 of 2
  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net