hi, just stumpled over the thread regarding the NetEA book.

imo a very good place for the army lists would be the armybuilder site of adam77. How about this: we create a folder with sftp access for all list developers along with an universal naming convention for the latest list (bloodangel_latest.pdf, for example) and ask adam77 kindly to provide a link to each of the army list. This would be a one-time work effort if everyone sticks to the convention. That would at least solve the availabilty problem.

This kind of "page of links" thing has been done several times.

For example:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193888
and
http://www.players.tacticalwargames.net ... Army+Lists


Whilst they work for a while, they soon go untended, links break, lists are updated, etc.

I remain convinced that the ERC finishing the push and publishing an annual Armies Boook containing all NetEA lists, as well as noting whether they are Approved or Experimental, is the best solution.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Wow! They links are old!

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I'm with E&C on this one. I think a (bi)annual 'NetEA Army Book' would be great and would be a real asset in attracting new players.

I think many players (esp. noobs) don't need the very latest list or want to get involved in the machiavellian development process, so IMO, an annual army book should be the 'public face' of the NetEA list development process. Players who want to get more involved can put the time in figuring out the taccom forums.

Currently my site links to the NetEA list development forums. It would be awesome if I could link to the 'NetEA Army Book 2010'.

My 2c

_________________
Uti possidetis, ita possideatis.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
An online epic force creator: Armyforge

Spot on.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

To clarify; what is wanted is a single, comprehensive and cohesive PDF compiling the various existing lists from the 'EA Force Lists' subfora – correct?

_________________
Industrious, red-robe wearing member of the PCRC

Effectively, yes.

Preferably those that stand up to proper scrutiny. Any list that's being updated on a weekly or monthly basis (or should be), I'd rather see kept out until they've progressed to a more solid point. IMO, lists should be capable of going a year, without any revision.

Morgan Vening

Morgan: That's why the lists are clearly labelled as "Approved" "Experimental" or "Development". There's no need to keep the "development" lists out of the file, they're just clearly described as unfinished. There would be a note in the file explaining that there may be more updated versions of the development lists available, but for newbies that doesn't really matter.

I think you meant "not to keep the Experimental". I believe Experimental is the lowest level of stability, followed by Developmental, and finally Approved. At least I hope that's the way it is, or the NetEA Draft Documents are all messed up, I think.

I just figured it'd add to the confusion if they were included. "Here are the lists, except some of the lists have changed, go here to find them" seems not that different from now. And the inevitable "Hey, they changed it, Manta's have Fearless now." "Really? Since when? I wouldn't have assaulted!". At the moment, Experimentals have a quick turnover, and I'm all for that. I just don't feel they fit the purpose of the NetEA Army Book.

Also, the inclusion of only 'stable' lists would help Tournament Organisers by allowing them to just say "NetEA Army Book Lists only", or adding inclusions, rather than adding exclusions.

Finally, I think it'd be an incentive to some of the designers, to get their list up to a finished level for inclusion in the lists.

Morgan Vening

I agree it might worth omitting the Experimental lists (or stuffing in an appendix).



I don't envisage it working like this, rather it would be...

"Here are the lists, go play
p.s. If you're keen on getting involved in list development/testing then go to the taccom forums to find the very latest revisions."

_________________
Uti possidetis, ita possideatis.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
An online epic force creator: Armyforge

Yes, I think that the only good solution is to have a complete PDF/book of all the armies, because if they are scattered all over the place, or not updated properly, it becomes something of a nightmare to keep up with the changes which are made.

_________________