>"Standardize" a word of dread or relief, depends on who you ask. We seem
>to agree on standardizing certain weapons, but not points costs. Hard to
>understand. I realize many don't like a lot of change, that's okay. But
>I find it funny that we accept GW's original rules and stats so readily
>when we KNOW they are not well thought out nor tested. I don't view a
>coherent plan for points cost as standardization, but a necessary step
>to put some reality in a points system that has none.
>
>Note we don't need to change anything, but those few units that people
>have a problem is, thing is when it comes time to change it, what
>objective criteria will we use? There is none. If we use a comparative
>scheme, we might as well use Jar's, at least his makes sense, whereas
>GW's scheme does not.
>
Im all for Jar's solution, since it sounds well thought out.
If we are going to go along with a broken / unfair point system, why bother
at all ?
Thats like riding a car which you know will wont drive the direction you
want it to :)
Weasel
How many lives will be taken today?
How many times will we just look away?
Pennywise - One voice
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Received on Tue May 14 2002 - 12:16:43 UTC