Peter,
I understand that 74% wanted a change but are we going
to the alternative that got 50% or the one that got
24%? Because the other 26% who thought leave them
unchanged would most probably vote for the 5+ save
oppossed to the 4+ which got the 50%. Back to square
one on this poll.
But in thinking upon this rather than complaining
about it wouldn't a +1 to the termies save vs. weapons
with no TSM (+2 for weaker weapons 9the few that are
out there)) be an easier alternative? I always killed
termies with bolter fire. How would people vot if
their termies were 25-50 pts more expensive.
Just my bias that termies are fine the way they are
and why can't we have bike companies.. Boo hoo...
Darius
--- Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Darius, you have to add the percentages of the two
> options that wanted
> change. They add to 74% which clearly surpasses the
> 2/3 majority. Once a
> want for change is established, then the alternative
> with more votes is
> it.
>
> One must remember that majority does not stem from
> the votes on just ONE
> alternative. Alternatives are grouped into
> categories. For examples most
> polls are between "change" and "no change". The "no
> change" is usually
> one alternative, but the "change" are usually
> several. For purposes of
> interpretation the multiple alternatives under
> "change" out-weigh that
> of the "no change" alternative. Once it is
> determined that change is
> wanted then the alternative with more votes in the
> "change" alternatives
> is the victor.
>
> Jyrki interpretations were pretty standard and would
> be the same I would
> have done for those alternatives.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: darius spano [mailto:dmanspano_at_...]
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 6:32 PM
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0]Marine revision part
> I poll summary
>
> I disagree with your decision for the first poll to
> change the terminators. 2/3 is the cut-off and this
> was not met. People want to change their saves but
> there is no 2/3 consensus on any of the choices and
> there is a big difference between a 4+ and 5+ save
> whether it is modified or not. Terminators usually
> die
> from bolter fire and not lascannon fire.
> Why don't you have a poll to see which upgrade is
> preferred but this would also end up in a 50/50 draw
> making the upgrade point meaningless. 2/3 is 2/3. I
> wanted he Space Marine bike company too but hey we
> couldn't get the 2/3 majority and this was much
> closer
> than the terminator poll. Just my thoughts.
> Darius
> --- jyrki.saari_at_... wrote:
> > POLL QUESTION: Which saving throw for terminator
> > marines do you prefer.
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - 4+ save modifiable to 6+ but no further., 17
> > votes, 50.00%
> > - 5+ unmodifiable save., 8 votes, 23.53%
> > - Current one (5+ modifiable to 6+)., 9 votes,
> > 26.47%
> >
> > This was two-in-one. First part is whether people
> > want to change the Terminators' save or not. Since
> > about 74% of those who voted prefer an upgrade,
> the
> > save will be changed.
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Should infiltrating units be
> allowed
> > to
> > enter close combat with their
> > infiltration move?
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes, 13 votes, 40.62%
> > - No, 19 votes, 59.38%
> >
> > This is a clear one. A clarification should be
> added
> > to the "Infiltration" special ability in the core
> > rules.
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Members will decide whether Cyclone
>
> > terminators will be added to the
> > armylist.
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes, 20 votes, 60.61%
> > - No, 13 votes, 39.39%
> >
> > Since less than 2/3 favors this one, it will not
> be
> > a core unit. However, it has large enough support
> to
> > warrant an optional unit. The next question will
> be
> > about how to implement the Cyclones. Stay tuned!
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Land Raider Crusader availablity to
>
> > chapters other than Black Templars.
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - One detachment only to replace the transports of
> > one terminator detachment., 7 votes, 22.58%
> > - One separate detachment., 15 votes, 48.39%
> > - The current one (a special card to replace the
> > transports of entire terminator company., 7 votes,
> > 22.58%
> > - Other (please send suggestion to the list)., 2
> > votes, 6.45%
> >
> > Again, a clear one. From now on LRC will be
> > available as one detachment per chapter other than
> > the Black Templars (and possibly White Scars
> > depending on the outcome of the speed poll; see
> the
> > latest incoming).
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Should assault marine CAF be raised
> > to
> > +4?
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes, 11 votes, 34.38%
> > - No, 21 votes, 65.62%
> >
> > Assault marine CAF will not be raised.
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Do the veteran marines need a stat
> > change?
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes, raise the to-hit number to 4+., 13 votes,
> > 41.94%
> > - Yes, give them 2 attack dice., 6 votes, 19.35%
> > - No, they are good enough as they are., 12 votes,
> > 38.71%
> >
> > This is a close one, but again slightly less than
> > 2/3 favors a change. This means the veterans will
> > stay as they are.
> >
> > POLL QUESTION: Members will decide whether a
> marine
> > bike company (see part I summary) will
> > be added to the marine armylist.
> >
> > CHOICES AND RESULTS
> > - Yes, 20 votes, 62.50%
> > - No, 12 votes, 37.50%
> >
> > Since less than 2/3 wants to include this it will
> > not be a core unit (&#XX$!). However, the support
> is
> > again strong enough to warrant an optional unit.
> >
> > The Part I is thus concluded. Part II polls will
> be
> > concluded 6.6.
> >
> > Jyrki Saari
> >
> > -There is no such thing as free lunch because
> eating
> > takes time and time is money.
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
> http://launch.yahoo.com
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
Received on Fri May 24 2002 - 02:05:54 UTC