Page 6 of 8

[ 108 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Couple Of Imperial Guard Questions
primarch	Post subject: Couple Of Imperial Guard Questions Posted: Tue May 06, 2003 6:20 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am Posts: 27069 Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA	Hi! Gandalf, you are NOT alone, not by a long shot. Remember that many of us just dont care to post on "official" GW forums, nor would we last long if we did.} You have to understand that GW is not used to direct input from players. Their design process has been always closed to the "average gamer". Not that this is a bad thing, its just a different philosophy. Remember that they are a rather large company and it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to design "by popular vote". Also remember the rules GW produces are a means to a goal, that of selling more minitures. This is, of course not bad, they are a business first, but it does affect the rules design. Therefore, input is used more as a marketting guage for their current ideas, designs and philosophies rather than a true influence on changing the design. Remeber that its "jervis's" vision of what he wants epic to be, after all he's working on it in a virtual vacuum (ever wonder why people like chambers, gav and others are conspicously absent? Food for thought), so I understand he has a very large burden on his shoulders and I sympathize with him. In the end the game will reflect his views along with ideas and input that reflect his philosophy. Having said this, it doesn't mean you or anyone else has to like it. In the end it all comes to what YOU, as an individual want out of the game. I made that desicion long ago and I am extremely content to coordinate and help out with netepic. Which by the way you can participate in by simply by joining the mailing list and posting your views on any subject. It depends a lot of what kind of gamer/person you are. Some are content to let others design a game for them and others want a direct hand in that process. Both have their merits, all you need to decide is to which you belong to. As for Epic's A long term persepctive, I wont bore you with my usual rants on the subject, they are on these forums and a whole host of others, suffice to say I agree your forecast. Primarch _________________ Primarch The Primarchload Magnetized Titans Tutorial Net Epic Gold Heresy Rules
Top

Gandalf the Grey

Post subject: Couple Of Imperial Guard Questions Posted: Tue May 06, 2003 7:16 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:23 pm Posts: 789 Location: Tampa, Florida

Hey primarch, I wanted to respond to some of your comments and I forgot! I had too much to say! 1. Jervis may SAY he understands why epic40k failed, but he REALLY doesn't. From things he has posted on those forums he puts all the blame on marketing when thats only PART of the problem that game had. Exactly. ?If Epic40k was as great as he thought, it would have marketed itself. ?Remember by this time every GW player knew what Epic was, as SM/TL was very successful. ?I remember looking at the Epic40k box set when it came out and I couldn't believe the direction the game was going in. ?I rejected it like everyone else. ?It wasn't until later did I appreciate Epic 40k, but I do believe it got what it deserved. ?It was just a radical change to a system everyone liked. 2. His refusal to admit of analyze the GOOD points older games had and why people like them and perhaps use them.

I agree. ?AT/SM had some really cool rules, and while it was clumbersome and almost impossible to play out large games (ours lasted 3-5 nights). ?I felt it was rich in detail and was great for 2,000 points or so games. ?Building custom Titans was a lot of fun, and it was interesting to see what others did with theirs. ?I do agree SM/TL was a step in the right direction in order to play larger games, but it didn't feel like the wargame AT/SM did.

3. His constant attempts to ignore epics past. Thus the infamous "Section 8" rules and no points for older models. If he had any chance of getting a significant number of "old hands" on board for this game, this point wont win them any friends.

My protests against not posting points are pretty well documented in the forum, but I'll say again that his decision is pretty lame for us older players. ?As a side note, one of the cool things about Epic 40k is that it is pretty much immortal, and since it doesn't require specific rules or stats for most vehicles, units like the Defiler will fit nicely into a 'Khorne' chaos engine, if that is what it is. . .

4. No REAL feedback. Admittedly this one is baised by my experiences with net epic. But why ask for feedback if you are going to ignore everything that doesn't fit Jervis's "vision" for the game? I have seen Maksim and others repeat "ad-naseum" that deathstrikes are unbalanced or orks are underpowered and yet no real resolution. You can now understand why myself and many others on the net epic list never bothered to fully participate with EpicA. I suspected, that in the end, it would be Jervis's game, not the communities game. So be it.


That is how I began to feel too. ?It was like 'here' then we reject it, then he argues for it, and then it's a rule. ?I know this is Jervis's baby, but still. ?I think he's alienating some of Epic's hardcore fans believing he can win over newer players.

I wish you guys complained harder in the forum. ?Maybe a riot is just what EpicA needed. ? ?Who cares it you got kicked out? You could just get back in under a new name anyway.

PS: Why is Andy and Gav not more directly involved? Not that I think they are needed, as I find Andy a little too detailed on rules sometimes, and have never found much of Gav's stuff really pivotal. ? ?