Remember when 40k was good? Remember when you had a game actually designed to accommodate super-heavies? Remember when a single stray rocket could hit an Imperator Class Titan in the reactor and cause it to explode? Remember when Eldar had transports with infinite carrying capacity? Remember the ridiculous pink Slaanesh crab-titans?
Specialist Games remembers. Talk about Epic. And Warmaster if you want to.
Dunno why, but I always preferred infantry on the square bases (set out like the 5 on a die) than in a line. Pic may or may not be related.
>>43962002
>Remember when you had a game actually designed to accommodate super-heavies? Remember when a single stray rocket could hit an Imperator Class Titan in the reactor and cause it to explode?
That's what's weird about superheavies in 40k. They blew the scale up so that one titan is the equivalent of a very large army... yet made the rules absurdly simple, so that it's basically just a monstrous creature with a bunch of weapons and 10,000 wounds- no lucky hits taking out the legs, no disabling weapons or shield generators, no nothin'.
>>43962002
>ant scale
no thank you
>tfw the Imperial Guard player brought nothing but Baneblades
40k looks crowded with 1000 points of troops on the table, let alone a knight or two. Epic makes so much sense.
>>43962088
To be fair, the level of abstraction in Epic can lead to some pretty hilarious stuff. But I'd rather have the occasional silliness of an Imperator getting rekt by a Killa Kan than have half my army be literally useless because my opponent plays Knights.
>Epic Armageddon
>Imperators
>>43962123
Well, most of that shit originated from Epic, so that's probably why. I get that it's cool to see these huge models in regular 40k and all, but the slow slide from "Apocalypse games only" to "except if you bought this supplement" to "fuck you, everyone gets Lord of War slots in the basic FOC" was the absolute killing stroke for 40k for me.
There is literally no valid reason to ever field a Warlord in regular 40k. Hell, I'd probably go so far as to say anything bigger than a Land Raider should probably be left for large scale games.
>>43962210
The other problem with that stuff in 40k is the old one about the length of the human arm. The biggest possible wargame table you can have is determined by the distance that players can actually reach the models to move them around, meaning in 40k all these massive units are fighting over a really small area (OP's pic is probably not far off the maximum 40k table size) and it's just kind of stupid. Epic didn't have this problem at all, you can actually have enormous battles.
>>43962264
Also, they did armour saves right. Terminators were dead hard, and vehicles didn't spontaneously explode or tank fucking everything.
>>43962157
>To be fair, the level of abstraction in Epic can lead to some pretty hilarious stuff
See, the thing is that Epic's abstraction accounts for the weird shit that does happen in the fluff from time to time. So a big shoota taking out a titan might represent anything from hitting a chink in the cockpit armour and taking out a princeps, to hitting a sensor that causes it to fall over, to taking out a coolant line and causing it to overheat, to some kind of elaborate plan that actually involves three dozen bomb-squigs, a looted vox-caster and a kunnin' nob. Meanwhile, in 40k it's literally impossible for most units to even scratch the paint on a titan no matter what. No Wazdakka jumping his bike into the cockpit for you.
Whether you think it's better or worse that enough bodies can eventually take down even the biggest targets is up to you to decide.
>>43962002
>Remember when 40k was good?
I don't remember very many fictional time periods, no.
>>43962915
>Implying Epic, Necromunda, Gorkamorka and Battlefleet Gothic weren't good
>>43962036
Depends on what you play, I guess. I find lines are more effective for getting the maximum number of dudes in range.
>>43964144
This is the one thing that really pisses me off about Epic.
Why not just have a STANDARDIZED Base Size and Shape and balance the game around that?
>>43964168
Was this problematic?
>>43964224
You could arrange dudes any way you wanted as long as the base size conformed to specific dimensions. So you could have a square base, or a long thin stand in either direction, and so on.
Since there were certain minimum and maximum requirements, it wasn't necessarily a problem since the ability to minmax was limited, but it meant that you kind of had to think about how to do your bases for your infantry.
It's a fantastic game - as in, it's actually a good game. There's so much movement that you find yourself thinking pretty hard about every activation, and you always need to think a few moves ahead because of the way formations support each other in assaults when close enough. I think it's GW's only truly tactically-intensive game.
>>43964168
It's a very tiny difference. The real problem with the squares was painting the guys in the back. So they changed to strips and if they had standardized them, everyone with existing square bases would've been very upset. They were anyway, but that was because they were idiots. Anyway, in Epic: Armageddon there are maximum and minimum base sizes. Minimum: 5mm in one direction, 20mm in the other, max. 40mm. In practice people usually decide based on aesthetics and, now that everything's discontinued, availability.
For anyone starting out, go to www.net-armageddon.com for rules and army lists. Onslaughtminis.com and http://vanguardminiatures.co.uk have some proxies. For everything else go to eBay, paint up a few minis, post on the Tactical Command forums until people trust that you're not a GW spy (there've been cease-and-desists), then PM people to ask if anyone's interested in casting up some custom minis for you.
>>43964834
>It's a fantastic game - as in, it's actually a good game. There's so much movement that you find yourself thinking pretty hard about every activation, and you always need to think a few moves ahead because of the way formations support each other in assaults when close enough. I think it's GW's only truly tactically-intensive game.
I play Orks. Even though I get massive bonuses to WAAAAAAGH! straight ahead and basically suck balls at anything that isn't punching weedy gitz in the face, it's still remarkably tactical.
>>43965165
Ahh yes the ole army of 6s because that is what you need to roll.
I have lots of fun playing orks.
>>43964224
It's not a complete dealbreaker, but you can model for advantage to a certain degree, since some baseshapes are more advantageous for some troops than others.
Again, not the biggest of deals, but there is really no point rules-wise to not just commit and balance accordingly.
>So they changed to strips and if they had standardized them, everyone with existing square bases would've been very upset.
Yeah, but the fear of upsetting players is exactly one of the things that led to the decline of the rules quality in general. Sometimes you have to piss a few people off to improve. Just explain properly that you are doing this for balance purposes and try to smoothe the waves a bit.
>>43965554
Also the army of "Broken? Wuzzat?"
Enjoy your fearless warbands with grot meatshields that don't add blast markers, and nobz removing the ones you do actually get.
>>43966027
>Just explain properly that you are doing this for balance purposes and try to smoothe the waves a bit.
I thought the Epic 40,000 (3rd ed) rules explained it very well. It was ridiculous for people to be upset about it.
Being unhappy about the rules was understandable. They were good, but also fundamentally different from 1st/2nd ed. More abstract than Epic: Armageddon, with a BFG-style gunnery table. They probably should have said, "Use these for truly large games, and feel free to use the old rules for smaller ones."
>>43964144
>Depends on what you play, I guess. I find lines are more effective for getting the maximum number of dudes in range.
I dislike how people will turn the strip bases to the side so they can put 4 bases in the frontage of a single base facing front, just so they can get more stands within that 15cm firefight range. I doubt the designers intended for this tactic to be used because the Epic 40,000 design notes indicated that the advantage of square bases vs lines bases was greater density at the cost of increased vulnerability to barrage. The sideways line base trick gives double the density of square bases.
>>43966440
I wasn't around for the whole Epic Clusterfuck back then, but it sometimes makes me wonder if the whole thing led to the complete abandonment of balance by GW, together with the kiddy demographic of LotR. LotR was a beautiful piece of a game, but the kids didn't give a fuck and since the grogs that cared about the rules were so prone to bitching, it doesn't seem entirely out of the question.
>>43966453
In NetEpic:Armageddon, you can only have a max of two stands engaging another stand in assault. So that helps a little.
>>43966453
Hmmm I turn strip bases on their side simply because I like the way it looks, I have never used the advantage you speak of.
Does it really come up that much?
I am just not sure if it is that big a deal.
>>43966523
Let's not confuse terms. NetEpic is a fan-led refinement of 2nd edition. Epic: Armageddon is 4th edition. NetEA is a fan group that develops army lists for Epic: Armageddon.
>>43966474
>I wasn't around for the whole Epic Clusterfuck back then, but it sometimes makes me wonder if the whole thing led to the complete abandonment of balance by GW, together with the kiddy demographic of LotR.
Good point. I would’ve been happy to abandon that set of bitchy fans too.
I'm not looking forward to a new Epic if Specialist Games actually is reanimated Frankenstein style. The GW that wrote Age of Sigmar and the current 40K clusterfuck cannot make a ruleset as tight as E:A.
I want epic back if only because that is where squats truly shined
>>43966685
I just want the new models, to hell with the crap rules they are going to come up with.
NetEpic and EA are the champs.
>>43966685
I did see tiny versions of FW kits in some photos
>>43966717
Even new models aren't that attractive now. Odds are they will be overpriced, overwrought shit and the ruleset will favor whatever superduperhuperheavy new category of miniatures they will make to shill for $100-200 each.
>>43966685
The FW team is doing the specialist games, they will be sold at the GW main store rather than FW but its that group of people thats doing the rules/models.
Honestly all they have to do is make awesome minis and it will sell like whores on heat, everyone loves the Epic ruleset but the minis are fucking niche and hard to get by (Even proxies by other companies), new minis means the old ruleset can still be used if the new one sucks shit.
Now how are they going to cram a bunch of armies in one box? I got no idea, maybe it wont be one box but I got the impression that they wanted to follow the same pattern as the assassin/HH boardgames rather than create a whole new line, which can work if they make an "Imperial" side with some SoB, some IG, some SM and then the same for xenos/chaos, so you'd have to buy a couple of the boxes to get a whole Space Marine or Eldar army for example.
>>43966736
>I did see tiny versions of FW kits in some photos
Those prototypes are much bigger than the old Epic models, which is very bad news for compatibility with existing collections. Actually this implies a new scale altogether, maybe 10mm.
>>43966814
It would make perfect sense for GW to invalidate older Epic collections, wouldn't it.
>>43966770
It just smells like a setup for disappointment.
FW works best when they can do whatever the fuck they want, and nine times out of ten what they want is Space Marines. If they get press-ganged into toeing corporate line, their projects wither and die.
Remember Tamurkhan? Personally, I hated it for all it's Chaos Wankery, but at least they tread something new. It was completely drowned out because they had to do HUGE AND GINORMOUS MONSTERS for WHFB and the balance became a complete joke.
So all I'm seeing from this whole supposed Specialist Games Resurgence is, that FW is propably getting shat on and forced to crank out whatever games corporate thinks will sell with the least amount of investment possible. Maybe some nice miniatures will come out of it, but are you really ready to pay 3 bucks for a single base in Epic? Or 70 to 100 bucks for a Blood Bowl Team? And then the thing will wither and die and all that's left is a more fractured SG community.
>>43966838
>And then the thing will wither and die and all that's left is a more fractured SG community.
This is the main fear behind a shitty but official and 'supported' nuEpic. Look at fucking AoS, people will fall over themselves for a trashy, lame excuse for a game as long as it has the GW logo on boxes and mentions on the official site.
>>43966814
I do worry that they’ll switch to 10mm. That just means I’ll keep buying illegal proxies and playing the old game with a small group of friends, I guess.
But don’t read too much into that mini Warlord titan. From what I hear, that was a mockup for the 28mm version as part of its development process. It was not a mass-producible mini, according to someone’s friend’s friend in a forum somewhere. It may have been a 1/3 scale model compared to the full-sized one; 3-ups and 3-downs are common. That would make it look very much like a 10mm figure; 6mm would be 1/5 the size of a 28mm mini.
>>43966838
There’s a little bit of hope, though. The new CEO seems to be pretty different from the previous guy. And GW might actually have an interest in cornering these niches, now that games like Dropzone Commander and Dropfleet Commander are gaining attention. Tons of those players are disaffected fans of Epic and BFG.
>>43966932
The new CEO is the old CEO, dude. The old guy is still in charge of the board, he just gave up his double position because it's illegal in GB to hold both positions. In two or three years the current guy will leave, and then Kirby will "temporarily" hold both positions again. They've been doing this little dance for years now.
>>43966652
Who's confusing terms? I'm merely stating in NetEpic:Armageddon that is what the rule is. I didn't say that that is how the rule is like in Epic:Armageddon.
>>43966964
Oh, crap. So much for that, then.
10mm, $50 for a Warhound?
>>43967015
Is there such a thing as NetEpic: Armageddon?
>>43967032
http://www.net-armageddon.org/
>>43967032
>>43967053
The rules are in the tournament pack.
>>43967019
Sounds about right.
When you consider the old metal epic Armageddon warlord cost that much.
I play Epic30k using the Net:EA rules.
If it creates a market for these fishing weights from 1992, I'm all for it.
>>43966964
GW's internal structure is a major clusterfuck and what I think is also the principal cause behind all of their recent fuckups. There's a longform effort post from SA about it and long story short, the way things are set up at GW is really questionable by UK corporate practices.
>>43967184
Sorry bud there will never be a market for those 1st generation vindicators.
>>43967184
nice pic
>>43967138
Really?
>>43967448
Yep the old epic Armageddon stuff was quite expensive.
>>43967019
I'd pay that shit yesterday, hate 28mm titans because they are way too big and cumbersome but would love to have a smaller version because they look cool as shit. Besides in the old Epic rules you need like 3 and a bigger titan for 2000pt army.
>>43967532
I have several of these coming in. Looking forward to running a Titan Legio against my friend.
>>43967448
The metal Warlord was $30 when it came out in 1997 with Epic 40,000. Its price rose to $45 before being killed off. But it's worth 850 points (a typical game is 3,000).
A Warhound is only 250 points.
The plastic infantry was monopose but a fantastic deal. Probably 1400 points for $20 in the Space Marine box (but you'd have to add Rhinos and Land Raiders at $20 and $33 for four of each, respectively).
>>43967584
Sadly, I had too many old official titans to get those fanmade ones. The originals are underscale and the forumware titans are true-scale, and they don't work well together at all.
>>43967817
>The originals are underscale and the forumware titans are true-scale, and they don't work well together at all.
Just how bad is the size difference?
Personally I wouldn't get the forumware titans even if they were the same size because I prefer the original designs.
>>43967584
I understand if it's a secret, but where can you get those from?
>>43967584
I'm dreading (see what I did there?) the day they release new Gargant models. If they don't look like blocky pieces of shit it just won't feel right.
>>43967917
It's a secret, but if you go to the TacCom forums and lurk a while and request politely, someone will hook you up. That's what I did.
has anyone got a picture of that chaos warlord titan from white dwarf?
>>43967891
I've only seen the forumware Mars-pattern Warhound in person but it's bigger enough than the FW Lucius-pattern Warhound to put me off (despite being beautiful). Ooh, found picture.
>>43967917
I'd follow the last sentence of this post >>43964834
My 6mm Horus
>>43962122
TFW you out maneuvered that with ease.
Just thought I'd pop in to say I havent had a chance to email everyone since the last epic thread - have a backlog of forumware knight orders to complete. I'll see if I can do it tonight.
Only update is that I remembered I do thunderbolts, and so added them to my lists.
And no, I dont do the forumware titans, but the thing to remember, is there are DOZENS of recasters. I can think of at least half a dozen Ive spoken to, I have no idea who made the titans, but seeing as three people sell them, there are casts of casts of casts floating around out there so quality will vary.
>>43968113
neat
>>43968079
>>43968113
Okay, dude, that's seriously super fucking awesome. Kudos!
>>43968140
Have a lot more epic on my insta if you want to check out! # Ojahaja
>>43968079
>>43968113
MiniHorus a cute.
CUTE!
>>43968019
For general miniatures (2nd hand GW, not forumware) use the Facebook trade groups. There's a general gentleman's agreement to undercut eBay and its a healthy enough community that you will nearly always find someone selling the model you are after at a decent price.
>>43962122
>tfw the Imperial Guard player brought nothing but Baneblades
Considering how cheap 1st edition Baneblades are on ebay compared to Leman Russ companies, it's not a surprise.
>>43968019
>>43968115
So, based on the incompleteness of the discussions I see on Tac Comms, I assume there's some secret boards or some such nonsense?
>>43968362
>Incompleteness
What do you mean?
>>43968362
No, once people know you're actually trying to get into the game, they'll respond to PMs asking for contacts. Or you talk to people like >>43968115
But for certain 40k armies, onslaughtmini.com and vanguardminiatures.co.uk are close enough. Maybe also Trolls under the Bridge, if you send them an email.
.
>>43963115
Epic, sure. It had it's moments.
Necromunda, and GorkaMorka, meh. Some balance issues, and designed solely around being a campaign setting (not a bad thing).
Gothic? An unbalanced pile of trash.
>>43968202
Isn't there a group called 'Buy Sell Trade' or something?
>>43966814
>>43966896
>>43966736
The tiny versions of forgeworld minis like the warlord titan that you've been seeing were not made for Epic. They are proof of concept versions for the big models and not made with a specific scale like 6mm in mind.
They've been doing those for ALL the big minis for ages before starting work on the full size versions, and most of them aren't even the same scale as each other.
Epic is going to get new minis, but those aren't them. Besides, they'll probably start with the simple cash-ins like blood bowl or BFG where they can release them as standalone boardgames or sets like the betrayal at calth stuff, they'll probably not start with epic since that's the biggest undertaking of all the options they have.
>>43968202
This might be as good a place as any to ask:
What's a good price for a box of Epic Space Marine Warlord titans? All titans still on sprue, including the box and all. Somebody has offered to sell me one from an old collection and I'm guessing they might be somewhat of an collectors item, but I don't want to get ripped off.
Can you still get the forumware in pewter? Or is it only resin recast nowadays?
>>43968362
Nope, just the mod who is supposed to verify applications for membership never checks his emails, so there'll be months with no new members, then a slew of them.
Also the growth of Facebook groups means a lot of us cant be arsed to log in to a 3rd site anymore :/
>>43968441
Just that whenever I lurk there it feels like there's an waffle lot not being said in the open. Conversations that seem to pick-up where the got left off somewhere out of sight.
>>43968476
>No, once people know you're actually trying to get into the game, ...
Ah, and here's the kicker, I already got versions of most of the stuff I imagine I'll need. The real challenge is sources I can point people that I've prosthytised the Epic message to.
Telling them to 'lurk on this shady internet forum for a few months until they decide your not an agent' is too much work to get anyone to do.
>>43968202
Got any recommendations for good groups?
>>43968476
>>43968645
Also, where'd you get the castle?
>>43968115
Please do, I have been eagerly awaiting your response.
>>43968579
A lot of people are definitely getting them in pewter. Al uses pewter. There's another guy who used to pop in here (spends more time at 8_chan) who uses resin.
>>43968594
Oh yeah, I remember when I tried signing up with a gmail account and that apparently doesn't work! I'm a member there, so if your registration isn't happening post your email and I'll post it there.
>>43967917
I can assist you with them if you are serious.
Provide me with an email and I will contact you.
>>43968645
It has to be that way. It didn't used to be, but then Otterman got a C&D from GW a few years ago and everyone went underground.
>>43968715
>>43968715
>then Otterman got a C&D from GW
I remember that. I've lurked there for a few years now.
I do wish E&C's 'clean' stuff wouldn't scale creep so hard, especially on the heavy tank foot prints. Also, Plastics when?!?
>>43968645
>Telling them to 'lurk on this shady internet forum for a few months until they decide your not an agent' is too much work to get anyone to do.
Pfft worked for me and most other people.
>>43968757
I understand they are actually on the boat from China as we speak, very soon.
>>43968759
>Self selecting sample bias
100% percent of people on this side of the gate I've talked to were willing to do the work to pass through the gate.
>>43968665
Not my photo, unfortunately.
It's not working right now, but I am backing this to get the silver titan wall set. Pricey, but 6mm stuff is low-volume (in more ways than one!) so it's inevitable. But there are a lot of 6mm terrain manufacturers. Not that I know any, but TacComs has a Terrain section...
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/boneshop/boneshops-epic-6mm-titan-wall-and-modular-city-sys
>>43968792
It all depends on how much you want it.
>>43968645
Yeah, it’s unfortunate, but leave an email address for Al and ResinBro and you’ll be fine. Or, if you’re okay playing Tau or Dark Eldar, or female Space Marines, get Onslaught Mini’s stuff. Their quality is great, and the prices are good too. (The thing with their Sisterhood models is that they fit much better with the Space Marine army list than the Sisters of Battle army lists.) Vanguard Miniatures sells them in the UK, and also now sells the former Defeat in Detail minis (designed as non-infringing minis by a former forumware guy). Those sell in too-large quantities to be convenient for many people, but there’s stuff to form the core of Ork, IG, and Mechanicus armies.
I am giving the stuff a read finally checking out everything on net-armageddon. What I really don't get is:why didn't GW continue this? The insane numbers and firepower is more fluff friendly than the main tabletop 40k, and it's rules are akin to Historical style wargames where the rules don't have as many numbers as regular 40k, but are done in a way where it's more balanced and is more tactical...or at least it seems that way so far with what I have read. Gonna continue reading.
This would also be AMAZING as a video game that takes the deployment tactics of Total War, the in battle tactics of Dawn of War 2, and the sheer scale of Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander.
>>43968804
To writ:
>>43968645
>Ah, and here's the kicker, I already got versions of most of the stuff I imagine I'll need. The real challenge is sources I can point people that I've prosthytised the Epic message to.
It's a hell of a lot easier to shill a game to which you can tell people to wander into the merch section of the hobby shop and impulse buy the starterset.
I'd settle for "here's a mnemonic URL, go buy the new player kit" It's on this basis alone I look forward to a new Granny Wendy offering. Even if the rules are shite, one stop figure shop.
>>43968851
>Those sell in too-large quantities to be convenient for many people
The package sizes have recently been reduced so this is not longer a factor.
>>43968869
GW doesn't like to support good games.
>>43968873
Obviously it is not ideal but it is the best we can do.
It is not like someone can make a site to sell them without getting their shit pushed in by grandma wendy.
>>43968908
Oh, I know. I just like to whine about it.
I actively don't seek the forum ware community just so that when I have prosthytised to someone I can tell them with a straight face and no risk where I got the figure and where they can without question go and get something similar.
>>43968691
Where can i get in contact with the pewter guy?
>>43969005
If you've read the thread you'd know, leave an e-mail you're willing to expose to 4Chan and they'll get back to you.
>>43969029
Yeah, i already have contact with the resin guy, but i want to try the pewter to see if the quality is better.
[email protected]
>>43968955
Speaking of stuff you can yammer about sources openly about:
http://www.pfc-cinc.com/catalog/item/312935/71462.htm
Anyone worked with some of this company's stuff? Have prospective Chaos players I've been working on and was wondering about a prototype defiler
>>43969075
Was my quality a problem?
>>43969115
Might be a different use of the word 'quality'?
I like metal figures better, they feel like they have a certain 'gravitas' to them. A different handling quality.
>>43969158
Ah ok I understand that mentality completely.
I used to feel the same way.
>>43962210
Having one big model on the table can be cool in bigger fights, but a lot of the bigger monstrous creatures or superheavies feel very out of place below 1000 points, doubly so when they're taken in multiples.
A 2000 point Ad-mech army with a single Imperial Knight leading the charge can be cool. A 1000 point army with three Knights is just jarring.
There's also what >>43962514 said. Dreadnoughts and Terminators used to be a big deal, but all the rules changes have just led to bigger models trying to fill in those old gaps.
>>43968781
>its been so fucking long
I know its not his fault but its been over 2 years since the 1st kickstarter
Hopefully this time the things will come out well
>>43968869
Scale, people liked the 28mm stuff more
And to be fair theres good reason for that, it does look good.
But at the same time it made so much sense to see 40k as basically an Epic formation firefight and part of the wider conflict. Instead we got scale creep and fucking Knights as big as the table as a standard thing
>>43968869
The release of 3rd edition (Epic 40,000) was poorly received. The rules were more abstract than E:A, and MUCH more abstract than 2nd ed. (which worked more like 40k does). People hated that. The minis were a million times better, but also a bit pricey. Sales tanked before they even finished releasing all the armies. Five years later they tried again with E:A but without a boxed set, not that many people bought any of it. Meanwhile GW needed more space for LOTR stuff and they were going after younger buyers. The theory behind gamer age is that teens have more fun finding synergy between special rules, and older players tend to be more interested in positioning. Epic was good for the latter.
tl;dr - as good as Epic was, it had too few customers. Even during the brief moments of good GW support.
>>43969075
Just look further up the page, dude. And contact them both (or ask them to contact you) because they have different inventories.
>>43968869
>What I really don't get is:why didn't GW continue this?
GW kiiind of did a D&D 4th edition type mistake.
Epic used to be a main GW game like 40k, you could find epic minis in generic toy stores that had miniature stuff, not just gw shops etc, it was big.
Then they said "so okay, we have an idea for the next edition where we totally change the rules and mechanics, but it's going to be a better, tighter game, we promise" and people fucking hated it.
When they gave it another go with epic armageddon they didn't give it the amount of support it would have needed, it was too big a game to survive with second rate specialist games support, sporadic releases and only metal minis.
Besides, there's more money in making people constantly buy new 28mm armies than it is in having a tight rules set and cheap minis. This is kind of why I think Epic will be last in line for getting a revamp, I mean, do they really want to remind people that 40k used to have a smarter sibling with tighter gameplay and rules where you could put a complete Titan maniple or Knight household on the board without the game shitting itself and without people hating you with the fury of ten thousand suns?
>>43968696
>>43968115
Could any of you provide me with those "modern" style rhinos or even modern Chaos rhinos? Got a coupple old ones and would love to to mix them
[email protected]
>>43969754
Email sent.
>>43968115
[email protected] hit me up senpai
>>43966827
I've got Epic Squats. I'm already for sure not gonna be able to use my army.
>>43969873
Just play NetEA. Squats are still a thing with those rules.
>>43969873
Of all the old style infantry the squats have aged the best.
They could be released now and they would not look dated quality or sculpt wise.
>>43969873
This -> >>43969906, >>43969908
Got a set of Squats, just waiting for NEA development to stop dicking around with unit sizes and load outs and stabilize the list.
I live in fear that someone will dick thinks over like Aaron Dicky dicked the Titan Legion lists.
Dick.
>>43969999
What did he do?
I thought the list was "fine"?
>>43970191
>What did he do?
E&C had a version that was defacto approved before Dicky started dicking with shit because 'It didn't fit with how he felt it was portrayed in the novels' or some such bullshit.
In the end he radically changed the combat roles of several of the weapons systems and set approval back years. Even worse, he compelled people to reconvert things to match his personal 'vision'.
>>43970277
Ahh one of those guys.
That is the danger of having fan driven development I suppose.
>>43970328
>That is the danger of having fan driven development I suppose.
Indeed it is. Dick thinking that the BL is some form of reliable canon to base unit design on.
It's why I hold off on my Squat infantry. All the metal vehicles can be stripped an re-done if it comes to that but I don't want to have to either strip plastic epic dudes or source new clean sprues.
>>43970328
It's really no different with official development. The only two differences are that fan developers don't get paid and you can actually see the stupid bullshit that happens.
>>43969724
>>43969468
>>43969378
>>43968899
How unfortunate. Holy shit I just got to the Battlebarge rules. You're allowed to take the giant space cruisers? That's awesome.
>>43970493
You have to take them if you want to deepstrike your forces in most cases.
Also they can fire a huge barrage weapon or an anti titan weapon.
>>43970493
They just allow you to use Planetfall (like drop pods) and some bombardment. You can just pretend you have the model if you don't (or, search Aliexpress...)
>a game where Space Marines actually have to be played like special forces that hit hard and strike fast because they don't have strategic resilience
>a game where Imperial Guard and even Orks are more forgiving armies than SM
You can see why GW will want to make serious changes if they ever get a new Epic off the ground
>>43970775
New Epic is supposed to be set during the Horus Heresy, so it's going to be predominantly marine on marine action.
>>43970943
LOL GW is so late to that party.
We will all be done and tired of epic 30k by the time forge world gets their shit going.
Here's a post I wrote with a (female) Space Marine starter kit for 2,000 points.
Onslaught Sisterhood used as Space Marine proxies:
1x Command Squad
1x Themis Squad
1x Virtus Squad
1x Hecate Squad
1x Athena Battle Squad
1x Nemesis Bike Squad
1x Minerva Squad
2x Juno APCs
2x Hera Battle Tanks x2
2x Atropos Rocket Tanks
US $143.50, 92.44 GBP
Female Space Marines starter list, 2000 POINTS
Codex Astartes (NetEA Tournament Pack 2014)
==================================================
TACTICAL [325] (Hecate Squad + Command stand + Juno APCs)
6 Tacticals, Captain, Rhinos
ASSAULT [175] (Virtus Squad)
4 Assault Units
DEVASTATOR [250] (Hecate Squad + Juno APCs)
4 Devastators, Rhinos
TERMINATOR [350] (Athena Battle Squad)
4 Terminators
BIKE [200] (Nemesis Bike Squad)
5 Bike Unit
SCOUT [150] (Minerva Squad)
4 Scouts
PREDATOR [250] (Hera Battle Tanks)
4 Annihilator
WHIRLWIND [300] (Atropos Rocket Tanks)
4 Whirlwinds
Extras:
20 loose character minis
1 assault stand
1 devastator stand
1 terminator stand
1 scout stand
2 predator annihilators
2 whirlwinds
The extra stands can be used with characters for optional upgrade stands, or the 5 extra Devastators could be spread among 5 of the Tactical stands.
Also, play around with lists here:
https://traitor-legion.appspot.com/
Generally want to stick to the basic NetEA or EpicUK lists. There are too many lists imo, without any explanation of what they are. But these are the basic ones:
Codex Astartes
Steel Legion
Legio Gryphonicus
Ghazgkhull's Warhorde
Black Legion
Biel-Tan
>>43971080
>Space Marines starter list, 2000 POINTS
Kek. Good jorb at being neither fish nor fowl there. 1k is minigeddon, so might work fine. 3k is standard tournament minimum so would be the right number.
>That said, one of those 3k is probably titan and Navy support and Onslaught doesn't do that, yet?
>>43971031
>LOL GW is so late to that party.
>We will all be done and tired of epic 30k by the time forge world gets their shit going.
I don't mean to point out the obvious, but Epic 30k began in 1988.
>>43971303
I find 2,000 to be a better starting point than either minigeddon or 3k tournament battle. 2k points is also the lower end of the range for which the basic lists are balanced against each other (2k-5k in GW's words). You have enough points for the activation trade-offs to work similarly to 3k points.
I always recommend starting without flyers or war engines. Those are good additions to take a 2,000 point list to 3,000.
>>43968696
Can you post your catalog here? Me and some friends want to get a rough estimate of how much our armies would cost before we go any further (emails etc)
Any recasters, if you could contact me on [email protected] that'd be great.
>>43971485
I'm not him, but that would be an incredibly stupid idea from a legal point of view.
>>43971485
This is why recasters do their business via email.
