Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Rules Review Blog

 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Well, as much as I'd like to see a NetEA yesterday, I can't rightly do anything about it by myself.  Besides I should be paying more attention to Raiders anyway.  Somebody tap on my fish bowl when SG disappoints us again. :p

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK

(Markconz @ Feb. 02 2008,20:07)
QUOTE

(Moscovian @ Feb. 02 2008,18:44)
QUOTE
The mere fact that they are even discussing anything is because 50+ of us called to oust the Rules Champion.

Precisely ?:) ?
More is happening than it was (and thanks again for organising the petition Moscovian). It's still early days yet. I don't blame Jervis for being cautious having only just poked his nose outside the tower to see what all the noise was all about...

Like I say lets continue to gather strength and support.

Mosc, I would echo Marks comments

You may be closer to Greg, Dave, JJ, AH, Neal etc so may possibly have other information. However, I agree that things have started to happen precisely because the community have got together and made their feelings known in the petition you mention, together with the open letter to Andy and the ?Handbook?. As I said above it has always been my hope that we could use the development of the "Handbook" to achieve this unity of purpose by providing something concrete that others can join in.

Now, I would like to understand why people have apparently taken the positions outlined by Neal to see if there is some way that can be found to bring everyone back together for the common good. IMO it is definitely a case of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts, and so it is vital that we now find a way of continuing the process.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

Interesting thread. Since of the running of a "net" version of an epic version is the topic, I will weigh in on many of the main concerns and point out how netepic "did it".

GW NEVER gave netepic any overt or tacit support or authorization. We HAVE been scrutinized MANY times, they know we exist, but have never been ordered to "cease and desist".

No one from GW has ever contacted me or any netepic member regarding what we do. Oddly Jervis was (or maybe still is) a member of the netepic list and even posted when we we're in the process of our 5th revision. Crazy I know, but it proves we are "watched", GW fully knows what we do and where we are.

Of course the next question is "how". Over the course of the years I have spoken to lawyers about such issues regarding IP, derivative works and such.

The MOST IMPORTANT aspect of any net version of a game is that it HAS TO BE REWRITTEN IN YOUR OWN WORDS. Mechanics cannot be copyrighted. They are ideas, in a sense abstracted, its the physical manifestation (written rules) that is copyrighted. YOU CAN NOT COPY PASTE A SET OF RULES. I can't stress that enough.

This may sound like a trivial thing, but its not. Rewriting a set of rules in "your own words" is a monumental task. It took netepic almost a year of work to get version 1.0 out. Remember you can do short cuts by copy/paste, DON'T use GW original reference as a primer. You know the rules or mechanics and how YOU (or the group you represent) what the game played write it from your perspective. The more you keep to "your interpretation" of the rules the better.

IP terms. I will not get into the "dubious" legality of IP'ing terms like space marine and such GW does, but keep in mind they have more money than you and in court "he who has the gold makes the rules".....

Prominently display in the rules that such terms are owned by GW and used without permission or such similar disclaimer.

Now I'll tell you a bit of netepic history regarding the preceding statement. We we're ready to omit ALL GW IP terms and substitute them with generic names if GW took action. This means we'd change the IP terms like "space marine" to "powered armored troops" and such. Since the mechanics rewrite is not copyrightable removing the IP terms in such manner pretty much eliminates any actionable grievance with it.

Mind you it did not come to that with netepic, but YOU NEED TO PLAN FOR IT NONETHELESS.

Some parts of the law distinguish derivative works in regards to a percentage of difference between your work and GW's. Netepic has changed so much from GW's original work that making that case is a cakewalk for us.

It may be more difficult for EA, but enough fan related army list and mechanical difference may have been made to highlight the difference. More to the point, GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO HIGHLIGHT SUCH DIFFERENCES. While it may be based on EA, its NOT EA. You should strive to make that point.

Of course also make the point that your derivative work is better too...... :;):

A DOSE OF REALITY

Having said all this keep in mind one simple thing....

...GW has more money that you do, even if you comply with the letter of the law, they could still threaten you to remove or destroy your net based rules, since they know they have more resources than you and win by default.

Hasn't happened to us, but even after 11 years I am not naive enough to think that they would not try it. In essence its a risk you take and live with it. Your only protection is your relative success and the bad press it may generate shutting down a little fan based ruleset. Sometimes I think thats what has happened to us. Or maybe the somehow appreciate what we do.... nah.... :p

ON "DOING IT"

Make no mistake a netEA is a HUGE undertaking. Don't go into it with anything else than full throttle. The beginning is most crucial. Like building a house the foundation needs to be solid.

First you need a leader. While "electing" one is democratic, it would be preferable that the person who leads it be highly held in regard and respected by those in whatever group guides it.

Tall order I know. The only reason I wound up being "it" for netepic is that I'm the one who came up with it and by the time anyone really questioned it, years have gone by and frankly... who would want the grief!

While is fun to "lead", you got a ton of responsibilities. Your the one who has to put it all together and make sure everyone is doing their tasks and help troubleshoot any difficulties. Also you'll be the one to settle "disputes" and that will hardly make you popular. Unless you are very confident in your diplomatic abilities, it may behoove the group to get someone that is.

Note that I use "you" in a general sense meaning anyone involved in the endevour.

Next is the "team". I have favored a closely knit group of 3-4 people. One as the webmaster (their is no "net" without a website, another as editor in chief (in my view THE MOST IMPORTANT job of all) and as many "assistants" as you can manage.

Word of advice, in the early stages you get MANY volunteers. Time will tell if they have commitment. Believe me after the "weaning" process you'll find that truly committed helpers are a rare and valued commodities.

Once the team is assembled you need to set goals. Be realistic in assessing what, how and time it will require to do things. Remember its done for free, people have lives to work around, be considerate of real life demands.

Once goals are assembled, work out how the community will be involved. You should have a input stage, discussion stage, playtest stage and a ratification of results stage. It takes a while to do these things. Our last revision took more than 2 years and 1 extra year to edit.

Keep people in the loop. Gamers love updates, Give it to them, make them enthusiastic to participate.

"when your in command, COMMAND!" Line from the movie Midway. While participation of the group is good and fosters the sense of community, sometimes the team needs to make some calls in order for the rules to be cohesive, make sense and be balanced. You have to be careful to keep certain factions within the community of dominating all others or even silencing them. Its not done with any sense of premeditation, but gamers are gamers and defend their favorite armies and game mechanic biases with passion. Keep that in mind. Level the playing field when necessary.

Finally, ALWAYS, ALWAYS thank the fans for their support. They are after all the reason your doing it.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:53 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
Many thanks for taking the time to provide us with all that information Primarch. :)

Lots of very interesting observations in that post.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 8:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
Hi!

My pleasure!

Take the plunge and do it, thats been my advice for quite a while.

I understand however that while there are similarities of conditions between now and when netepic was born there are some differences that change the dynamics.

As an outsider to EA and its doings I perceive (and of course may be totally wrong) that there are two camps in the EA community:

1. Those, that short of an official statement from GW that epic is dead and will not be supported (occurrence which those of us whom have been around long enough know that GW never makes), will continue to wait for GW/SG to "officalize" rules.

2. Those whom wish to cut the cord and continue to develop/revise the game (pretty much what some have been doing anyway) independently of GW and whether or not they support it.

I have no words of wisdom for this situation. I had it easy and had a "unified front" when netepic was created (you either like epic 40k or not and if you didn't you gravitated to netepic). So its a tough set of variables to deal with.

Some gamers just NEED official say so from GW. They even existed when netepic was born (although those types are rare birds nowadays), some don't. I don't see any middle ground between the two.

If one group breaks off, you'll get the usual "you're not official anymore" and if you stay with GW you get the current limbo with no end in sight, which will turn all but the most fervent away as the years go by and no support materializes.

Alas, that is one conundrum you EA chaps will have to figure on your own.

I don't envy you the task and wish well and may the results be for the good of EA.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:37 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Once again Primarch has provided his sage words of wisdom.  :cool:

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
Things seem to have gone very quiet here.

While I appreciate and welcome primarch's wake up call to some of the realities of Net:EA, this should not prevent us from continuing to try to get the current amendments accepted and ?"authorised" by the wider community.

At present, while the amendments are largely accepted, we lack the final seal of approval that some communities need before they will accept the new version. How can we move forward from here on the rules (without going into Net:EA)?





_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Ginger @ Feb. 08 2008,20:51)
QUOTE
At present, while the amendments are largely accepted, we lack the final seal of approval that some communities need before they will accept the new version. How can we move forward from here on the rules (without going into Net:EA)?

By desiminating the rules changes amongst all the people we play EPIC with and how they improve the game.

Looking at the similar thread on the SG boards, I was very surprised by the strong "No changes!" mindset displayed there... that's what one needs to counteract.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:45 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5483
Location: London, UK
Umm, I was thinking the reverse actually.
  • The debate on the Flamer template has largely subsided in favour of using normal barrage templates, so we should strongly consider the appropriate revisions.
  • The air rules have always caused issues, especially around ways to improve them - so the debate was no surprise. However, no-one really objected to the proposed changes in themselves which I would take as a qualified agreement
  • MW barrages was hotly debated at the time, so the comments here were also unsurprising. Since opinion is so divided, I think we should probably postpone or drop them as not having sufficient backing
  • Fearless is a step in the right direction, but may need further work - so keep it in
  • Commander change is really an unknown, mainly because it is so rarely used. Consequently I guess we need to try it a bit more, so am less sure whether it should be included this time round or not
  • Finally OW on garrisons was debated long ago, and has been a proposed change for years - but has it been in use for that time?? There has not been any recent threads to my knowledge, but that doesn't prove the case either way. Here, I would suggest trying to see how much it has actually been in use or not, and if it has been used, then the intervening silence can be taken as general approval
As for the vast majority of the changes / clarifications, the lack of critisism would seem to indicate at least grudging approval. Now I would prefer a formal ERC stamp of approval, but in the absence of that, if we continue to have no negative feed-back to continued calls, I would suggest that may indicate that there is in fact agreement.

My major concern really lies with Neal's reported response from JJ and the past ERC whose views I have always respected. I do not understand why, having worked so hard to this end, they should suddenly make an about turn on implementing the changes. I feel that we are missing something fundemental here.

Finally, assuming we do determine that approval has been reached, I still think we should try to get the changes into the SG site. Here, I would prefer the complete rulebook be updated (so retaining all the other bits left out by Markonz) and ask for the new version to be put in the vault.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:34 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

(Ginger @ Feb. 08 2008,23:45)
QUOTE
My major concern really lies with Neal's reported response from JJ and the past ERC whose views I have always respected. I do not understand why, having worked so hard to this end, they should suddenly make an about turn on implementing the changes. I feel that we are missing something fundemental here.

I agree. It was at this exact point that I felt that the ERC/SG suddenly became an obstacle to EA development, rather than just ineffective.

I am puzzled.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:11 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(CyberShadow @ Feb. 09 2008,00:34)
QUOTE
I am puzzled.

Without being party to the entire conversation(s) it is difficult to say why any of this happened.

"Why" isn't the issue. What we can do to resolve it is the more critical point.

Perhaps some sort of petition?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Petitions won't work.  They capture attention but when weighed against 'real concerns' they won't do anything.  To us it is a hobby but for these people it is their JOB - the thing that pays their bills, puts food on the table, clothes their kids.

Even if I worked at GW and I was handed a petition I would probably do NOTHING with it, fully feeling the tide of change.  With the officers slashing huge sections of the company off I wouldn't be the one to bring up getting more support for little ol' Epic, nor would I devote any time to it.  I would be updating my resume and doing everything to make my masters happy.

They have abandoned us (again).  It is time to move on.  And speaking of which...

Well, at the FERC (ERC for french speaking people, for people who don't know us), the Banshees have been modified to this ;


I found this quote from Magarch very interesting.  A French ERC that has obviously been in existence for a prolonged period of time and GW has not summoned the attorney-clap-of-death spell and extinguished them! More evidence that they could not care less what we do with the rules.

I agree a full rewrite is probably the best way to go but I think a little bit at a time can be done rather than an all at once approach.  Honestly there is a lot in the rules that needs to be rewritten anyway just because of run-on sentences, bad verbage, lack of precision, etc.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Moscovian @ Feb. 14 2008,16:33)
QUOTE
I found this quote from Magarch very interesting. ?A French ERC that has obviously been in existence for a prolonged period of time and GW has not summoned the attorney-clap-of-death spell and extinguished them! More evidence that they could not care less what we do with the rules.

And I don't think the FERC has published an alternate ruleset to compete with the SG Rulebook... it's most likely just "spit-balling" ideas like we do here.  They haven't claimed independence form GM (Viva la revolution?!).

Once something like that happens, GW will come down like a load of bricks on the perpetrators.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
The Tau list has been in development for years yet it competes with the FW publication.  CS can correct me if I am wrong but they haven't tried to shut it down yet.  SG is aware the Handbook 2008 exists and yet it hasn't been pulled yet.

I am not saying GW Legal is a lame duck.  I am saying that an effort to rebuild a set of game rules slowly while using the Handbook 2008 in the interim and having our own Rules Committee would most likely go off without a hitch.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Rules Review Blog
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Moscovian @ Feb. 14 2008,17:03)
QUOTE
The Tau list has been in development for years yet it competes with the FW publication. ?CS can correct me if I am wrong but they haven't tried to shut it down yet. ?SG is aware the Handbook 2008 exists and yet it hasn't been pulled yet.

Er... that would be because CS's development of the Tau is officially sanctioned by SG. ?He's the Tau Army Champion, and despite the many holes in the bucket, it still holds a little water... *laugh*

And, despite GW's lack of support, the currently worked on lists do some small part to sell GW's models.  The moment something touches on the EPIC ruleset saying, "Oh, and buy these awesome models from DRM!", GW will come in guns blazing.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net