> Hi!
>
> Hehe, I must admit that one of my great joys is watching our Nordic
> friends (Rune,Eivind and crew)duke it out as far as getting
> good units
> in for their respective armies. It reminds me of my "golden" age days
> when I had a lot of people around and got a lot of games in. Lord
> knows I used to argue far worse than they do as to what to
> use and how
> to use it in a game.
I think i'll choose to take this as a compliment:)
> Of course, as far as development goes, their group is one of
> our great
> resources since they play constantly and consistently. In any event
> they will let us know soon enough, how "balanced" a proposed optional
> unit is.
I havnt played in months :(
> Its just too bad they dont live closer to me, it must be a hoot to
> game with them.
Hehe, yeah, we always have fun :) We argue constantly though, but
it never gets ugly...
>
> --- In netepic_at_y..., jyrki.saari_at_n... wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ext primarch_at_b... [mailto:primarch_at_b...]
> > > Sent: 12. June 2001 15:38
> > > To: netepic_at_y...
> > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] On the new squat units
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Ahem, this is where I repeat my old beaten mantra, "any units
> created
> > > from the conclusion of the revision of net epic (now version
> > > 4.1)onwards are considered optional and should be sent to Tom for
> > > inclusion in Incoming!
> > >
> > > Repeat- OPTIONAL. No unit will EVER become mainstream without the
> > > usual vote and extensive playtesting.
> > >
> > > The presentation of of optional units should be considered a
> > > adding to
> > > the variety of selection. One must remeber that this list is
> > > all a lot
> > > of people have as far as new ideas and new units for
> thier armies.
> > > Therefore it is good to add things in an optional manner.
> > >
> > > We all know that hardly anyone on this list plays net epic as is
> and
> > > there are many house rules and such. Just view these add-ons as
> > > totally optional, thus requiring consent of the gaming group
> > > involved. One man's "cheese" is another man's snack.
> > >
> > > I agree that one should NOT fill in the gaps of weakness a army
> list
> > > has as far as core units go, but one is curious to field
> "special"
> > > units and optional ones permit players to tailor the game without
> > > ramming an aura of officialty down a gaming groups throat.
> > >
> > > So let your creative urges loose ,its okay, it gives
> Incoming! mch
> > > needed material, it gives us something to discuss, play with and
> test
> > > and the great thing is if you don't like it, just forget it-it's
> > > OPTIONAL!
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> >
> > Hear, hear! From what I have observed, next to none of the
> new units
> are
> > actually playtested, so their effects can only be guessed at. As
> long as
> > there is no extensive playtesting data available, it's too early to
> condemn
> > anything, even more so since they are optional. Being cynical, it
> seems to
> > me that people are most worried about their principal opponent
> getting
> > something nifty... ;-)
> >
> > Jyrki Saari
> >
> > -There is no such thing as free lunch because eating takes time and
> time is
> > money.
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> This message confirms that this E-Mail
> has been scanned for the presence of
> Computer Virus, and deemed Virus-Free
> by F-Secure Antivirus
>
> Tue, 12 Jun 2001 13:01:03 -0000
> ***********************************************
>
***********************************************
This message confirms that this E-Mail
has been scanned for the presence of
Computer Virus, and deemed Virus-Free
by F-Secure Antivirus
Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:06:15 +0200
***********************************************
Received on Tue Jun 12 2001 - 13:06:15 UTC