RE: [NetEpic ML] GW vs Epic questions

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 15:28:16 -0400

Hi!

The question is would it be opposed? Would list members chime in on this
one? Is tech guard necessary?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: jyrki.saari_at_... [mailto:jyrki.saari@...]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:44 AM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] GW vs Epic questions

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Peter Ramos [mailto:primarch_at_...]
> Sent: 21. May 2002 19:32
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] GW vs Epic questions
>
>
> Hi!
>
> Same with me, although, according to you logic, there should be no
> separate PDF either.....
>
> Peter
>
[snip]

Why? Haven't you read Codex Exercitus? Ahem: "Every Imperial world has a
duty to raise and maintain its own planetary defense force." Report for
re-education immediately, Commissar Ramos. Thank you for your
cooperation, the High Lords are your friends ;)

IMO it is highly illogical that, after the Heresy, there exists an
organization outside the administratum which has its own private army
AND fleet transport. PDF is no problem since they won't leave their home
planet without Imperial Fleet to transport them.

Besides, I really loathe tha "Machine God" background. Notice that I am
not proposing the eradication of Tech Guard from Net Epic. Although the
temptation is great, such proposal would have no chance whatsoewver of
actually beig accepted.

Jyrki Saari

-There is no such thing as free lunch because eating takes time and time
is money.


To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Received on Wed May 22 2002 - 19:28:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:41 UTC