| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
(Markconz @ Dec. 21 2007,10:40)
QUOTE The process I've described above IS the important thing here IMO. Chroma in position as AC has put out a different list to that in Neal's Change Documents, which confusing, and seems out of line with the AC position IMO.
So, you're saying that the posting of a "change list", in the Eldar development section, by the Eldar Champion, is something against "policy"? ?Since you've released your "Handbook 2008 (2007)", does that mean you feel no more changes/proposal/edits should be posted to the experimental section of the boards for fear of confusion? ?That's the whole point of this forum! ?And these are the changes I would like to see implemented in the next incarnation of the Eldar lists.
I've wanted to discuss the Eldar changes with Neal, but the rather blurred transition between myself and Sotec, the surprising, if inconclusice, SG response of interest from Andy and Jervis, as well as the chaos of the holiday season means he and I aren't really getting a chance to discuss it until, probably, the New Year.
I want AC's who are actually interested in supporting a unified approach. If they are not doing so, then they basically cease to have a purpose IMO.
You want ACs to do something your way? ?Where are you getting this authority? ?Have you discussed this with any other Army Champs? ?And what the heck is a "unified approach" anyway? ?There's no real process in place, don't know if there's ever been one, and, hell, there's no ERC to submit things to anyway! ?*laugh* ?I don't think Neal wants to spend his holidays reviewing army notes instead of spending time with his family!
With respect to process - ?deadlines should not be delayed continuously as they have in the past. When the deadline hits, whatever was favoured by Neal Hunt (or the Head Honcho at that time) should actually be released, and set until the next review.
Do you mean the deadline you set, for yourself, for your own Handbook project, one that coincided with a changeover of Champions and some contentious issues still in debate, or was there some other broader deadline decision I was unaware of, since I haven't been the Eldar Champion for very long.
Markconz, you seem to be chomping at the bit to start NetEA (or whatever it would be called), but starting that, before resolving what Andy and Jervis's response to it, especially in the middle of the holidays, is probably going to create even more confusion for casual players than an experimental army change doc (Especially one with, essentially, ONE significant deviation from your Handbook!).
This minor issue missed the boat this time around. The person in charge left it out. Discuss it sure, but don't release a document in a form that has the potential to confuse people.
So, have you informed Cybershadow that he's not allowed to change the experimental Tau army he's Champion of for a year, to prevent confusion? ?I'd say there's potential for more than just "minor issuses" in the Tau list and really can't see why it was included in what is attempting to be the "official" new rulebook.
Otherwise we might as well all release our own personal preference for everything, and AC's, and petitions in favour of some sort of due process - like appointing Neal as ERC head, be damned. Is that what you want?Actually, what I would want is the opportunity for everyone interested in EPIC:A development to have a chance to sit down in a room and talk things over, but that's not going to happen; so discussions on forums it is.
And what's wrong with people expressing their personal preferences and ideas for things? ?One of the points, I believe, of the Army Champions is to collate and distill those ideas, flavour it with their own ideas, and present that to the players for testing.
And I don't think "due process" is what you're looking for here, you're looking for a fixed development process, but, since we're all volunteers here, I think it's going to be hard to force people to do it your way... if they don't think it's the right way.
Just so you know, Neal and I are planning to have a thorough discussion on the Eldar changes Sotec presented; Neal has been concerned about more than just the Aspect Warrior Troupe, but wanted to keep "stepping on toes" to a minimum and let a lot of things through; so, to warn you, there may be significant Eldar changes/corrections in the New Year, but, right now, the Biel-Tan v1.8.1 document is where I see the Eldar.
Thank you for your efforts and happy holidays!
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
Army champs should not put personal preference ahead of everything else in a case like this. This document is just going to cause confusion. Sorry Chroma but I am not happy about your decision here at all.