Update 2024-03-27: Greatly expanded the "Samples" page and renamed it to "Glossary".
Update 2024-04-04: Added 5 million mid-2011 posts from the k47 post dump. Browse (mostly) them here.
Update 2024-04-07: Added ~400 October 2003 posts from 4chan.net. Browse them here.

Welcome to Oldfriend Archive, hosting ~170M text-only 2003-2014 4chan posts (mostly 2006-2008).
[31 / 0 / ?]

Attempt at homebrewing an Epic-scale game

No.3077034 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
/tg/!

There was a very interesting Epic thread recently, which got me thinking about making a non-40k game using similar mechanics.

Its big "thing" was unlike Epic, where you bought "detachments" which were always the same, your army would be based on a number of "companies" or "sections" (half-companies) which you then split into as many control groups as you wanted. You would be encouraged to do this, because there would be combined-arms synergies for certain units (for example, if you had a certain ratio of Battle Armour to infantry, the infantry gained additional firepower bonuses - and these stacked. Say the golden ratio was 2:1 meatbags to mechs for a given bonus. If you had 4 squads of men in a group and 2 points of BA, the bonus would be doubled.

At the company level, you would have immense choice in assembling your force. Each company entry would have a "basic composition" at rock-bottom points for bulking out your force with grunts, a "standard composition" which would be a relatively balanced force (for single-company games) and then the option to customise a company for specific roles.

Companies could also exist in three different tech levels, from basic up to experimental. This would adjust the cost and unit options accordingly.

Choosing the size of a game would thus have two parameters - number of companies and company cost. So if you wanted a massive battle of grunts, you'd say have a large number of low-cost companies.

(more to follow)
(Hygogg unrelated)