I think Yarr is doing a great job, and there are several points that he will
get round to raising eventually, development by discussion group needs to be
structured, and so far Netepic 5 has been. Yarr will put up his trail books
before the races revision, we get to read and go through them in depth and
then the discussion starts, forewarned we are able to put forward arguments
and raise points that otherwise might have been missed.
I am all for this format, and think that although it creates a lot of extra
work for Yarr (for which we are all grateful) allows the development of
NetEPIC to proceed in a much more orderly fashion.
As long as every change is discussed eventually, I see no problem with this
approach.
Tom Webb
Webmaster of the EPICentre
http://www.netepic.org - Home of Netepic, EPIC:
Armageddon, VOID and Heresy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zerloon" <zerloon_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 2:48 PM
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Could you tell me why?
> Please could you tell me why in the Core rules and others book in the
files
> sections, 5.0 there are rules like artillery and new flier that we never
> discussed?
>
> I think Yar's not a stupid, so why you insist to put YOUR stuff in the
> "official" book giving it an "officially thay doesn't have"?
>
> Maybe I'm a little exaggerated, but this is, for me at least, a very lack
> of respect, 'cause I'm not a shep that take all for good, and I want to
> play NetEpic by Discussion Group, not NetEpic by Yar.
>
> I think you are doing a great job indeed, but adding your stuff without
> talking about is simply unfarir. Antichrist idea are not worth like
your's?
> Idea tht we post to be discussed are not worth mentioning? Peter's
> Copy/Paste is useelss?
>
> I don't think so.
>
> Please excuse agressive tone and bad english, but I'm Italian and
> hotblooded too, so please Let me Know!!!
>
>
>
> 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 Mon Apr 14 2003 - 14:11:16 UTC