Hi!
As long as we relate these battles in our own way and words (and
preferably with our own spin) there shouldn't be a problem.
As to promoting GW, it's been our unspoken policy to let GW promote
itself and let Net Epic stand on its own merits. As for approval, as
long as I have the lists members support that is good enough.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: yar_underwood [mailto:jarreas_at_...]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 11:52 AM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] Optional material
I was talking to a gentleman last night and he suggested putting in
some of the famous battles of the 40K history into Net Epic. Like the
Isstvan V massacre, the seige of the Imperial Palace, the first &
second Armageddon (I think they're on the third right now) and so on.
What're people's opinions of that, what battles should be included
and is anyone willing to write some up?
The whole point is to make the Epic universe tie into the 40K
universe so that the regular 40K players might actually be interested
in making the switch and joining our ranks. The more tie-ins we have
the more likely they are to be interested in playing Epic:Armageddon,
and thus making GW more money. If we put the "play Epic and spend
money on GW models" spin on things we ought to get at least nominal
GW approval. Opinions?
-Yar
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 Thu Jul 11 2002 - 20:44:58 UTC