Subject[dq] Warrior 3.0, Two Parts?
FromBernard Hoggins
DateSat, 2 Jun 2012 01:32:27 +0100 (BST)
--1178430600-645231022-1338597147=:57571
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'd like to bring up a proposal to split the vote on Warrior 3.0 into two p=
arts.=0AI'm not sure how many people think we need more testing or not on t=
he special abilities, but I know there are one or two I'm not entirely happ=
y with myself.=A0 Mainly things that modify numbers at run time, rather tha=
n a precalculated change.=0ABut the 'simple' changes to when the bonuses ap=
ply, the defence & SC calculations seem easy enough, so would it be possibl=
e/practical to vote on those seperate from the special abilities.=A0 That w=
ay we don't loose some good run time changes simply because not everyone is=
 happy with the special abilities.=0A=0A=A0=0AFrom Bernard Hoggins=0Anevyn0=
ad@yahoo.co.uk
--1178430600-645231022-1338597147=:57571
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><body><div style=3D"color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:ti=
mes new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span>I'd like t=
o bring up a proposal to split the vote on Warrior 3.0 into two parts.</spa=
n></div><div><span>I'm not sure how many people think we need more testing =
or not on the special abilities, but I know there are one or two I'm not en=
tirely happy with myself.&nbsp; Mainly things that modify numbers at run ti=
me, rather than a precalculated change.</span></div><div><span>But the 'sim=
ple' changes to when the bonuses apply, the defence &amp; SC calculations s=
eem easy enough, so would it be possible/practical to vote on those seperat=
e from the special abilities.&nbsp; That way we don't loose some good run t=
ime changes simply because not everyone is happy with the special abilities=
.</span></div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>From Bernard Hoggins<br>nevyn0ad@yahoo.=
co.uk</div></div></body></html>
--1178430600-645231022-1338597147=:57571--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --


SubjectRe: [dq] Warrior 3.0, Two Parts?
FromWilliam Dymock-Johnson
DateSat, 2 Jun 2012 17:32:57 +1200
--0015175cd9e8244f8704c176a236
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I vote we render it moot by having 80% casualties inthe next campaign
event. Speaking of which, how many games can you run for us over the next
two years. There will be support and since we'll do most of our meetings in
pubs, beer.

William

On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Bernard Hoggins <nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk>wrote:

> I'd like to bring up a proposal to split the vote on Warrior 3.0 into two
> parts.
> I'm not sure how many people think we need more testing or not on the
> special abilities, but I know there are one or two I'm not entirely happy
> with myself.  Mainly things that modify numbers at run time, rather than a
> precalculated change.
> But the 'simple' changes to when the bonuses apply, the defence & SC
> calculations seem easy enough, so would it be possible/practical to vote on
> those seperate from the special abilities.  That way we don't loose some
> good run time changes simply because not everyone is happy with the special
> abilities.
>
> From Bernard Hoggins
> nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk
>

--0015175cd9e8244f8704c176a236
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I vote we render it moot by having 80% casualties inthe next campaign event=
. Speaking of which, how many games can you run for us over the next two ye=
ars. There will be support and since we&#39;ll do most of our meetings in p=
ubs, beer.<div>
<br></div><div>William<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 2, 201=
2 at 12:32 PM, Bernard Hoggins <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:nevy=
n0ad@yahoo.co.uk" target=3D"_blank">nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk</a>&gt;</span> wro=
te:<br>

<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style=3D"font-size:12pt;font-famil=
y:times new roman,new york,times,serif"><div><span>I&#39;d like to bring up=
 a proposal to split the vote on Warrior 3.0 into two parts.</span></div>

<div><span>I&#39;m not sure how many people think we need more testing or n=
ot on the special abilities, but I know there are one or two I&#39;m not en=
tirely happy with myself.=A0 Mainly things that modify numbers at run time,=
 rather than a precalculated change.</span></div>

<div><span>But the &#39;simple&#39; changes to when the bonuses apply, the =
defence &amp; SC calculations seem easy enough, so would it be possible/pra=
ctical to vote on those seperate from the special abilities.=A0 That way we=
 don&#39;t loose some good run time changes simply because not everyone is =
happy with the special abilities.</span></div>

<div>=A0</div><div>From Bernard Hoggins<br><a href=3D"mailto:nevyn0ad@yahoo=
.co.uk" target=3D"_blank">nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk</a></div></div></div></block=
quote></div><br>
</div>

--0015175cd9e8244f8704c176a236--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --