Hi!
OK Peter, isn't this the point, I'm sure that those are all good ideas,
but
what I expected something different, a revision of the "Actual" NetEpic
to
correct weak points, to introduce new good ideas keeping the original
view.
Heresy was in my opinion the alternative choice to NetEpic, a case study
where a new game system could be tested and implemented.
I'm not sayng "no I want still play with NE 4", just that if this is the
moment for "Advanced NetEpic" Then I just want to open a discussion
about
NetEpic 5 for those that want correct the actual system.
I see changing of point cost, changing of army composition etc. we
talked
about a point cost formula just a guideline and not like a revision
dictate, I see tons of polls about thing never tested, if those changes
are
intended to be compatible with the actual system then introduce them,
playtest them (in the actual system) then (then) vote for changes, AFAIK
it
was the original NetEpic Way to work.
---> But note we aren't changing much, we ARE letting in a lot of
optional things, but they are optional, like I said before on a casual
glance not much of anything was made "core" precisely because its not
tested. The voting is more to see what optional people want not make it
core. I think the disagreements are more a misunderstanding, people must
realize that they are OPTIONAL. I don't think any poll Jyrki put out
except the terminator save has been anything but optional, same with the
core rules.
> All is good; we're keeping the two editions anyway. Everyone should
play
> the one they like best. There no need to have another "schism", epic
> already has one of those. We can support both editions; we have
evolved
> to the point where "just" one is not enough. Besides, it gives us more
> to do and talk about.
I think no one want a scism, as Nils said this is a group, and I'm sure
that also for rules availability the more the better, but I want to
focus
on the goal: a quite different system or a correction of the old one?
I think this don't have to be seen as criticism but as a warning about
what
we are doing, all these discussion have just one purpose, let us enjoy
this
pastime.
---> Hmm, well maybe me and you remember differently, but we have always
included stuff we thought "good" sometimes without much playtesting,
then throw it out or include it later. Remember our flier rules? We've
had three sets, all voted in, none tested much until later, all thrown
out. Heck we voted in marine saves on a 6+ without testing it either,
but we kept that one because it worked.
Perhaps I should be clearer when poll results are done and the word
optional be stressed more. Remember that it's indeed a new policy to
accept more optional stuff, but core stuff is still rare.
Peter
--
Lorenzo Canapicchi
TXT e-solutions S.p.A.
Via Frigia 27, 20126 Milano Italy
tel: 02.25771.460
http://www.txt.it
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 Fri May 31 2002 - 14:38:10 UTC