Re: [NetEpic ML] You live and learn

From: Jarreas Underwood <jarreas_at_...>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 16:48:32 -0400

You've raised some valid points. Let's see if I can address them to your
satisfaction, or at least clarify my position on them.

>What I'm worried for is the amount of changes to include
>and playtest after the end of the project.
I think we're missing on something here - the project ends when we have a
version 5.0 already playtested and available for public distribution. I
typed up an alpha version and am looking for proofreaders. I'll take that
feedback, create a beta version and upload it to Yahoo. *That* gets
playtested for another few months, we discuss it, create polls on the
optional rules, etc. Perhaps by Christmas we'll be able to come to
consensus on what we like and what we're willing to tolerate, and I'll type
up Net Epic Version 5.0 - and we'll live with it for another few years
'till we do this all over again. That sound reasonable?

>Another strange thing is that we use an "alpha" version of a point cost
>calculation system to propose changes in the official release.
A little off the mark, but there *is* a problem. You're not the only one
that thinks my calculations need some work before they should be consitered
for official - I do too. I released the alpha of the cost analysis in order
to get feedback. If I get any I'll release a beta and *then* suggest they
become official. If no one cares enough to comment I'll refine it a bit
myself and suggest it become official anyway - care to help?

>Actually we "should" work on marines and what I see it's a pandora's box
>that produce continuously ideas, changes on point cost, polls about
>everything, core rules and/or specific themes.
Actually, that describes this whole internet mailing list thing pretty
well. You're right - it is a Pandora's Box, and I think it's wonderful!
Yes, a lot of blah, blah, blah and useless ideas (I know - I've contributed
a few myself *grin*) but a lot of creativity as well. The trick is keeping
the good stuff and junking the rest, and knowing when to call it a day.

>I'm not saying (again) that I love NE 4.1 as it is, or that I don't want to
>change it, or that I don't like the point cost formula, I'm just saying
>that _maybe_ this isn't the correct/best way to work if our goal is to
>build a better NE version.
Fair enough. The way I'm doing it is, collect all the ideas people throw
out, type it all up into a beta version and playtest. Then come back and
throw out the junk. What's a better way? I truely do not mean to be
sarcastic or anything - I'd like to know how you'd do this.
-Yar
Received on Mon Jun 03 2002 - 20:48:32 UTC