Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 7
  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

The increasing power of aircraft
pixelgeek
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Quote (Legion 4 @ 17 2005 July,07:41)
Yes, Tas's points are very valid, and both he and I have "real world" experience with CAS.

Well "real world" experience is a nice thing but ultimately you're talking about a game and one of the criteria for a game ( as opposed to a simulation) is that it be fun to play. I played SPI's Air War with a friend and while I am sure it was more realistic than "Bommas over da Sulpha Riva" it was dead boring and took forever to play. Not that Bommas was a great game either but if I was forced to play one over the other I wouldn't be playing Air War

I'm not knocking realism but I think that some of the earlier rules were more realistic but less interesting to play. In fact some of them were so boring we played without aircraft.

G/W's rules guys are no where near as "good" as AH's, SPI, etc.


Fair enough. Andy Chambers isn't James Dunnigan but whose company is still in business? And whose games are still on the market? In the end these are still "games" and they need to be fun to play.

G/W wants to appease the kids that buy their games and makes up some silly, unrealistic(?) rules to sell more models/toys.


Well thats a nice general rant about GW but I don't think it applies to the current discussion. In fact Epic:A had aircraft rules much more similar to what you are describing but they were... well dull. And, as I have said, who wants to play a game with dulll rules.

As well, this is all a bit moot since the air system is up for fairly significant review and as I mentioned previously you can and should send suggestions regarding the air rules if you find them deficient.

plus their obsession with making 40K and Epic comparable, etc

In what way?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,09:35)
plus their obsession with making 40K and Epic comparable, etc


In what way?

Sorry to Hijack this thread, but ?

PG and any one else who has been on the playtest board for more then a short while knows what is meant by that comment. Many people, both GW staff and just plain fans have made many choices based not on what makes sense for Epic, but rather what is important to 40k. PG you know your own views on Robots were rejected, not because they were not good, but because the 40k team ?does not want Robots, well except Necrons??.

The fact is, if I played a WWII Skirmish game I would expect the feel of any particular army to be different then when I played a tactical game. Further, I would expect an army to feel even more different if I played a campaign wide game. At GW they work hard, sometimes too hard, to make sure that the Epic army does not have any different feel then the 40k army. Oddly they make a point in the fluff of telling of the multitude of variations that exist and then force all IG to play the same etc.

In fact to bring this slightly back to topic, the whole Flyer issue began because they had to follow the fluff that the 40k was doing right then, remember? We had to base the army lists on Armageddon. Limited Airpower says the fluff in 40k, so Epic had to follow.

OK, enough of a rant.

dafrca

_________________
"Every Man is a But Spark in the Darkness"
              - Cities of Death, page 59

Come fight me, if you dare...... http://dd-janks.mybrute.com
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Quote (dafrca @ 17 2005 July,12:04)
PG you know your own views on Robots were rejected, not because they were not good, but because the 40k team ?does not want Robots, well except Necrons??.

I didn't want to respond without being sure what in particualr was being said.  Its a pretty big topic with a lot of related but divergent issues.

Part of my issue requiring clarification is that I don't particularly think that we need to be beholden to 40K fluff (especially when there are so many areas not explored in the background for a game of Epic's scale) but also because I don't think Jervis in particular is that fixated with the fluff. Perhaps its because he has seen it change so often to fit the whims of the current 40K design team?

Are Necrons robots? Aren't they filled with the spirits of the dead?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:51 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
I agree with PG, the old epic air rules were more realistic... but very dull. Having all your arty off table is also more realistic... but also dull.

I am curious PG when you mean the air system is up for 'fairly significant review' what exactly do you mean? I thought all that was up for discussion at present was the +1 to hit on intercept/cap orders modification?

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Quote (Markconz @ 17 2005 July,12:51)
I am curious PG when you mean the air system is up for 'fairly significant review' what exactly do you mean? I thought all that was up for discussion at present was the +1 to hit on intercept/cap orders modification?

The Rules Review committee started with that small suggestion and it lead to some more expanded suggestions by committee members.

I'm not sure if it will go anywhere but there is a, I think, significant majority of people that feel that the aircraft and flak rules need a rewite to make them simpler to use and more balanced.

I can't get into specifics since nothing has been confirmed as being suggested as an experimental rule yet

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
Well Daf answered as I would have about 40K vs. Epic ... he and I usually agree ! ?And I agree in that I generally like the E:A rules, much better than E40K and I like FA on the board too. ?So I think (?) most of us agree. ?Oh, and I have 9 Robot Dets. (both metal & plastic !  Plus Chaos Androids ! ) :D ?The point about realism/game vs.simulation, etc., etc., is an old story, however, Tas and my "threshold" for reality vs. a fun game, etc. will be different than yours P/G, based on a number of things. So, like we always on this site "Do what works for" ! ?As for AH, SPI, etc., IMO, most buy G/W models cause they are very good ... their rules system are secondary ... of course I have 9+ Epic armies so I'm an example of that ! ?:laugh: ?Plus dozens of AH's, SPI's etc. ... ?I'm eclectic like that ! :;): ?I too think the Tau followed by the Eldar are the most hi-tech/"modern" armies on the board, most of the rest are just hi-tech WWII, but I've said that before. ?And I like that paradigm ... ? As far as my "rant" on G/W, that was not my intention, I like most of E:A, and as I said have many/most of the Epic models, from all eras ... ?I look forward to any rule updates on the E:A system but so far most of E:A (@85%) works for me ! ?Don't take offense P/G, my opinion is just mine and means nothing ... "Do what works for you" ... ?And on our gaming table we're going to play Epic as we like, regardless ... ?It's just a game ...




_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tas
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:01 am
Posts: 7823
Location: Sydney, NSW
Quote (pixelgeek @ 18 2005 July,02:35)
Quote (Legion 4 @ 17 2005 July,07:41)
Yes, Tas's points are very valid, and both he and I have "real world" experience with CAS.

Well "real world" experience is a nice thing but ultimately you're talking about a game and one of the criteria for a game ( as opposed to a simulation) is that it be fun to play.


Quite true, and I always use my experience as a measure of something "feeling right" as opposed to an accurate simulation. ?And if its no fun, then nobody would play.

However, this thread started as a discussion of the escalating power/inbalance of Aircraft and their battlefield effects. ?In lieu of a streamlined aircraft combat system that meshes into the Epic system, I am suggesting that the older and more abstracted system worked better as a combined arms warfare game (and yes I did play it).

L4's comment on GW was both valid and pertinent. ?The rules GW generates MUST relate back to miniature sales by default (they ARE a company! However much we may forget that in our wargamers' zeal ?:) ) so having offboard support neither helps those sales, nor gives players the satisfaction of putting their nice, well painted lead on the table.

The best result, as usual, is a compromise between the two. And the necessary blood, sweat and obvious tears to get there




_________________
Tas
My General blog: http://tasmancave.blogspot.com/
My VSF Blog: http://pauljamesog.blogspot.com/
My ECW Blog: http://declaresir.blogspot.com/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,12:26)
Its a pretty big topic with a lot of related but divergent issues.

Part of my issue requiring clarification is that I don't particularly think that we need to be beholden to 40K fluff (especially when there are so many areas not explored in the background for a game of Epic's scale) but also because I don't think Jervis in particular is that fixated with the fluff. Perhaps its because he has seen it change so often to fit the whims of the current 40K design team?

Are Necrons robots? Aren't they filled with the spirits of the dead?

True, it is a large subject.

Oh and yes, the newest fluff has changed Necrons from Robots to Undead.  :O

dafrca

_________________
"Every Man is a But Spark in the Darkness"
              - Cities of Death, page 59

Come fight me, if you dare...... http://dd-janks.mybrute.com
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
dafrca
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:25 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:02 pm
Posts: 10956
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Quote (Tas @ 17 2005 July,16:34)
L4's comment on GW was both valid and pertinent. ?The rules GW generates MUST relate back to miniature sales by default (they ARE a company! However much we may forget that in our wargamers' zeal ?:) ) so having offboard support neither helps those sales, nor gives players the satisfaction of putting their nice, well painted lead on the table.

But had they made it an off table thing, then made more ground units, I would have bought them too.  :;):

dafrca

_________________
"Every Man is a But Spark in the Darkness"
              - Cities of Death, page 59

Come fight me, if you dare...... http://dd-janks.mybrute.com
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Jaldon
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:53 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am
Posts: 720
Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.
I am reminded of what Frank Chadwick said about realism in games. "If it takes three hours to play a game that represents fifteen minutes of actual combat, what is realistic about it?"

I used to own a whole host of J. Dunnigans SPI 'creations', most of them made real good door stops because they were real boring to try to play.

AH quickly went down the same road as SPI with this 'simulation' stuff instead of making games people want to play they worried about making realistic simulations nobody could find the time to learn to play much less actually find the time to set up and play.

GW on the other hand designs 'games' that have elements of realisim in them, and they put playability above realism, and that is a good thing because then the games get played a lot more then some of the 'shelf warmers' I still own (ASL being one of them)

Speaking for myself I play these games because I like a fun mental challange, and painting nice models, and building neat terrain, and meeting like minded people also interested more in fun then 'realism'.

Jaldon

_________________
Brave sir Robin, when danger reared its ugly head he bravely turned his tail and fled, Brave sir Robin.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
Again, reality is in the eyes of the beholder ... as is fun.  And I enjoy building and painting G/W Epic and making terrain, etc.  I rarely do anything else with any other wargames.  So there is some logic in your statement Jaldon.  However, many hardcore historical wargamers wouldn't touch any G/W games. I would like to think I'm in the middle; former Grunt, closet historian and Sci-Fi gamer.  And like Tas said, it has to feel right. So if we were talking about aircraft in Epic, I would like to make it fun and have the right feel.  So I'll modify the rules to suit my concepts of fun and reality, if need be. And do what works for me !    :;):

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Quote (pixelgeek @ 17 2005 July,22:23)
Anything concrete that you are specifically worried about?

Nothing that has become official. Myself and my friends have our own pet hates currently. With me its with aspects of things (45cm 360 defensive flak in the saim haine flyer for example - in a low point game its pretty much untouchable).

I think the current Did you play any of the older versions of th Epic:A aircraft rules? I always thought that the more abstract rules were a bit boring


With you there. Its like the deathstrike. Become a spaceship? I play these games to get the toys on the board. Indeed my yearly residential 1 week campaign WWII game with 60 other guys is all about using as many toys as possible and air - though handled very differently - comes down tot he same philosiphy as Epic A. No toy, no fun.

The fact is, if I played a WWII Skirmish game I would expect the feel of any particular army to be different then when I played a tactical game. Further, I would expect an army to feel even more different if I played a campaign wide game. At GW they work hard, sometimes too hard, to make sure that the Epic army does not have any different feel then the 40k army. Oddly they make a point in the fluff of telling of the multitude of variations that exist and then force all IG to play the same etc.


Well, I'm saving that to my notepad. Its bloody obvious but its something I forget (and I ain't played 40k in over 10 years).




_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Wow.  Come here to comment on what may be part of the reason for the airpower arms race, and it turns into a pretty impassioned topic.

IMO, part of the problem was/is that SG used the old weapons load from Epic 40k for the TBolt and Marauder, while it seems (especially the Eldar and Tau) the newer aircraft are using the Forgeworld model descriptions (Helltalon/Hellblade, anyone?).  The FW TBolt is much more powerful than the old TBolt.  The Tau Barracuda also has that problem (lots of really big guns).  

Another problem is that some army lists are using airpower to replace Titans due to their operational style (Saim-Hann I actuall don't like the reasoning behind, but Black Templars is kinda justified by the fluff).  In order for those lists to be feasible in a tournament, (not to mention 'realistic' in that they have some way to deal with Titans) there has to be some TK weapon on the aircraft.  Barring the use of uberbombs (the 3bp(MW) that I proposed, and was shot down for), there are only a couple other example weapons that they could use (Pulsar Lance from the Scorpion, Volcano Cannon from the Shadowsword).  Those weapons are all long-ranged tank main guns (OK, there is RL precedent for that, but...).

Just had to pour a little Prometheum on the Fire.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:39 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Back to the topic of issues specific to EA, I pulled this quote from the Tau-specific thread.  From JimmyGrill:
At other times, flak was so tight (This happens in almost all games of 4K+) that air also had a very limited use...


This illustrates very clearly why I see a problem in the direction of the EA army development.

Why is the flak so heavy, especially in larger games?  Because everyone recognizes that it is suicide to skip it.

At one point it was a viable choice to decide to keep just a bare minimum of flak/interceptors around.  Unopposed aircraft could do disproportionate damage, but a small amount of harassment fire was sufficient to reduce enemy air to the level where it was a real strategic decision about whether to go farther with flak assets.

Not so any more.  Massed flak is basically a "no brainer" choice at this point.

I'll use Orks as an example.  Until a few months ago, it had never occurred to me to use more than a handful of flakwagons.  In a 3000 point force I typically had 3-4 at most and a flight of fightabommaz.  Now when I look at an Ork list, I typically try to include 1 flakwagon in every formation with AVs and it seems like a very good choice to field a Blitz Brigade of all flakwagons - up to 12 in a single formation.

========

This is NOT simply a problem of "correct point costs."  No amount of point tweaks will fix this issue.

The problem is that the core rules have CAS as an auxiliary mechanic, a mechanic meant to be as simple and streamlined as possible.  It's not flexible because it never was meant to be.  Formations that are outside the general scope of the original intent will change, and (imho) are in the process of changing, the landscape of the game.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tiny-Tim
 Post subject: The increasing power of aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:42 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4893
Location: North Yorkshire
Why do people always have to deal with something. Aircraft I can accept, but Titans, if they're small overwelm them. If they're big leave them alone and concentrate on the rest of the army.

I went to Call to Arms with only one unit capable of a MW attack and that was my Big Bad Mek.

Tiny

Beat me to it Neal  :D




_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 7
  [ 102 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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