Re: [NetEpic ML] NetEpic Future

From: Ed Raith <ewraith_at_...>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 16:55:30 -0400

I'll reply to 2 areas of your comments, first I've been a long time gamer,
since 1971. I loved SPI, and people complained bitterly about their prices,
and they died. A huge loss. A few years later, the Flag Ship of Board
Wargaming, Avalon Hill, died. They tried to keep and thier prices down and
broaden their appeal. It didn't work. I play GW minatures because of the
death of board wargaming. You just can't go to a club set up and play, that
was 20 years ago. I have a new hobby now (miniatures) and I love it. [I
still do play board wargames but only once in a while] I do not mind paying
the prices of GW products. Yes by other manufactors prices GW prices my
seem high. But, remember your also paying to keep your favorite hobby
alive. I'm still upset at the loss of SPI and Avalon Hill. I find GW
prices to be fair and reasonable, considering that you get an entire hobby
(read: universe of fantasy and SF) with it. NetEpic should support GW
anyway it can.

Second area, I remember a novel, Starship Troopers that was written in the
50's or 60's. It's got Starship Troopers (Space Marines) vs bugs. It's
very close to some of 40K. Very good novel too.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "cibernyam" <cibernyam_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] NetEpic Future


>
> > As far as fluff and balance go, It seems to me that fluff has
> > frequently been invented as a response to manufacturing and sales
> > limitations. The Horus Heresy is a great example. GW only had
> > enough money for one Titan model, so they created a scenario where it
> > was believable that Imperial Titans would be fighting one another.
> > Balance is trickier, but the folks at NetEpic have been creating new
> > units for some time now, and I am confident that this problem can be
> > overcome if sufficient brains and effort are applied to it.
> > The current packages reflect the latest fluff. Deathstrikes are
> > becoming increasingly rare on the battlefield. The Imperial Guard
> > uses Chimeras, etc. The fluff is evolving, and I think that there is
> > room in NetEpic for people who prefer the newer fluff to the Rogue
> > Trader fluff that forms the foundation of NetEpic. A foundation of
> > fluff... what a terrible metaphor!
> >
>
> Following fluff is always a problem since fluff changes with each
> manufacturing wave. Nevertheless, IIRC Netepic fluff took one point from
GW
> fluff and made it static even when later on GW changed it in some manner.
> From that point, a consistent timeline was made and some small changes
were
> done. Luckily, Netepic has kept its own timeline with some borrowing from
GW
> and thus the Squats keep rocking. I hope we keep adding newer fluff
without
> having to change anything important in the core fluff; therefore I agree
> with you in trying to keep with the newer fluff but to a degree... Always
> with the golden rule of balance and maintaining old units.
>
> > I'm not too worked up about GW's prices, personally. I enjoy their
> > products, but they fall into the category of "discretionary
> > spending," so if they raise the prices, I just buy less. It's not
> > like I don't have enough unpainted miniatures already to keep me busy
> > till doomsday.
> > With the discontinuation of the archive service, however, it may be
> > important to maintain a database of proxy miniatures for units that
> > have been discontinued. I've had very little luck finding some of the
> > new NetEpic Squat minis that were from manufacturers other than GW.
> >
> I have to agree with that. Proxy finding may require to be upgraded in the
> priority list of NetEpic, should GW keep their price increase and lack of
> support politics.
>
> > I guess that part of my argument in favor of encouraging people to
> > by Citadel minis was to lessen the likelyhood of GW taking legal
> > action against NetEpic at some point in the future. If we're helping
> > them out with sales, they'll be unlikely to mess with us, but if we
> > start advertising for their competitors, they may suddenly become
> > possessive of their intellectual property (i. e., their ruleset and
> > trademarked names).
>
> I'm afraid we are not so important for them nor we can reach the level of
> annoyment to GW to take legal actions.
> From another side, while we keep being a group without profit intentions
or
> producing minis for their fluff, we shouldn't worry.
> And in the worst case, I don't think they have anything for bringing us to
> court, as long as we make clear that their trademarks and registered names
> belong to them and are used without permission. And of course we don't use
> any copyrighted material.
>
> Albert
>
> A Note: Although I know Space Marine is a registered trademark of GW in
the
> UK and probably in US, the idea and name of Space marines, an elite troop
> who fight extraterrstrial bugs out in the universe is not from them
> (probably from R.A. Heinlein or other Sci-Fi writers). I would like to
know
> how does this legal matters affect us. Anyone knows it? please no magister
> class in law, just plain and easy explanation, thanks.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Sep 03 2004 - 20:55:30 UTC