I'll keep that in mind...
Trygve
> -----Original Message-----
> From: primarch_at_... [mailto:primarch@...]
> Sent: 12. juni 2001 15:55
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] On the new squat units
>
>
> Hi!
>
> I honestly dont see most of them making it, mainly because playtest is
> slow, heck it took almost 2 years to mold the Slann! Also a 2/3
> majority is hard to pull off, just look at the poll history. Not too
> many adopted units, mostly rules.
>
> I'm much more liberal with small rules additions than with units.
> Rules tend to be tested every time you play, units are only tested
> when you play one army, far less exposure.
>
> What I will do some time from now is put all these units in a
> "optional book", so people may customize their games, but as for
> making them core, mostly likely not. I took out a lot of stuff from
> the last revision and made it optional, flier rules, a whole host of
> units, heck even those cool squat tanks, which have almost 3 years of
> testing, I left as optional.
>
> Units bring much contention to gamers circles, even more so than
> rules, because units belong to a certain army and people are
> passionate about what people field in their armies. In short any unit
> that is going to be adopted, a whole lost of playtesting by DIFFERENT
> groups needs to be presented and win a 2/3 majority vote, not so easy
> when you think about it.
>
> So have fun with your friends creations, you'll surely discard more
> than you keep and they will be optional for quite a few years still,
> before they can be considered to be "core".
>
> Peter
>
>
> --- In netepic_at_y..., Trygve Bj�rnstad <trygve_at_n...> wrote:
> > I fully agree to what you're saying, but many an optional unit will
> become a
> > core unit sooner or later. I'm just worried that all our armies will
> be too
> > similar, thus requiring no special tactics...
> >
> > Trygve
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: primarch_at_b... [mailto:primarch_at_b...]
> > > Sent: 12. juni 2001 14:38
> > > 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
> > >
> > > --- In netepic_at_y..., "P.J.T" <paul.j.t_at_b...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > My main concern with introducing these suggested units is that
> > > we're
> > > > > basically trying to give all armies a little bit of
> everything.
> > > This will
> > > > > only result in all armies being identical apart from the
> fluff. Is
> > > that
> > > > what
> > > > > we want?
> > > > >
> > > > > Trygve
> > > >
> > > > *Disengage cloaking device..*
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like Epic 40K to me.........bad move.......
> > > >
> > > > *engage cloak*
> > > >
> > > > Paul "TuffSkull" T.
> > > > http://tuffnett.com - TuffNett Productions Ltd.
> > > > http://epic40k.com - If its Epic, Its there!
> > > > http://welcome.to/weird_world - Weird World Wargaming.
> > >
> > >
> > > 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/
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
> 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 Tue Jun 12 2001 - 14:11:16 UTC