jyrki.saari_at_... wrote:
> Obviously, but the bottom line of the statement seemed to me to be: "Anyone who thinks there's anything wrong with the Eldar and especially WRH is obviosly a non-expert who shouldn't be messing with things his superiors are more fit to handle."
I don't know what seemed to you BTW if you don't like the word expert
change it with veteran or what (someone with experience with eldar army)
and the point is that no veteran Eldar general will say that WRH cost is a
scandal, what any sound veteran eldar general should say is that too many
WRH could umbalance a match. This is what I know from my experience as a
veteran Eldar general, and yes, if you think WRH is outrageously
underpriced I can only think you don't know Eldar army very well.
>
> You are allowed to speak but let the experts decide?
No i can suggest, i can give my opinion if asked but I know where are my
limits and I know that other people in this list can better judge the
impact of changes in a particular race, 'couse their experience is larger
than mine, don't know if this seems too strange for you.
>
> Since using the above definition I'm totally unfit to propose any changes whatsoever to any army, not to mention to be a project leader it may be best if someone else takes over the Imperial revision. Some super-expert who eats and breathes Imperium and has been doing so for the past 20 years. Any takers?
It's up to you, you must judge if you have the numbers and the entusiasm
to be a IG project leader, you also can be aware that someone in your group
have more "race skills" than you, but you also have to be sure about your
ability to manage a group to achieve a great work and this hasn't nothing
to do with experience in playng IG
And no matter how this doesn't have anything to do with that I said about
to be a veteran player and WRH debate, don't confuse these two things.
--
Lorenzo Canapicchi
TXT e-solutions S.p.A.
Via Frigia 27, 20126 Milano Italy
tel: 02.25771.460
http://www.txt.it
Received on Wed May 15 2002 - 11:44:11 UTC