Army list clarification?

This forum is now locked until it is time to start the process of writing the new Dark Elf army book.

Well done to all those who took part!

Moderator: The Dread Knights

Locked
User avatar
Reader of posts
Shade
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Netherlands, Huizen

Army list clarification?

Post by Reader of posts »

Maybe I missed this part in the revision rules, but shouldn't there be a section in which you clarify why you have taken certain units in your army, instead of others?

I mean, if i look at a revision list right now from somebody else (with no clarification) we don't have an idea why he/she has made those choices in his army instead of others (maybe he he's testing a against a certain army).

I suggest we should mention a unit choice clarification for each unit in our army list, why we have taken the certain unit, what we expect to do with it etc...
War is not about who is right, but who is left.
User avatar
Reader of posts
Shade
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Netherlands, Huizen

Post by Reader of posts »

bump.

langmann, I need your comment on this...
War is not about who is right, but who is left.
User avatar
Langmann
Malekith's Tastetester & Physician
Malekith's Tastetester & Physician
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Putting needles into people.

Post by Langmann »

I am not quite sure what you mean exactly?

Do you mean that in the playtesting reports one should say why they chose what they chose?

If that is so, it is good to do that, not not necessity, but I hoped that people would write at the end in the questions the answers which would include some of that. Maybe though you have a good reason for it and you could explain further where you are going with this?

BTW you have access to the Playtester's Guild, I will get your questions quicker in there. :)
While running a million dollar company, singing at weddings, and his frequent jetting to Spain Elton Jon style, Dark Alliance found the time to stand on the doorstep of Games Workshop like Moses and the Pharoah and calmly state, "Let my people go."
User avatar
Reader of posts
Shade
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: Netherlands, Huizen

Post by Reader of posts »

langmann wrote:I am not quite sure what you mean exactly?

Do you mean that in the playtesting reports one should say why they chose what they chose?

If that is so, it is good to do that, not not necessity, but I hoped that people would write at the end in the questions the answers which would include some of that. Maybe though you have a good reason for it and you could explain further where you are going with this?


That's excactly what I mean. I would be glad if we could implement this in the playtesting rules. In this way we could find out why certain units are ALWAYS taken and other units never or rarely taken. The playtesters could then clarify why they have not taken the certain unit. Then we could start thinking about a fix for that certain unit beacuse it's never taken in the army.

For instance. I will clarify in my army list why I have taken a beastmaster instead of an assasin, because I think he's crap.
If I wouldn't clarify why I have taken the BM, people will never know why I have taken it instead oif something else, and they might never find out why I think the assasin is worthless...
You see what i mean? [/quote]


langmann wrote:BTW you have access to the Playtester's Guild, I will get your questions quicker in there. :)



Great news, I will post these kind of topics there from now on. :D
War is not about who is right, but who is left.
Dark Alliance
Morathi's Favoured
Morathi's Favoured
Posts: 9738
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:29 pm
Location: In the paintshop

Post by Dark Alliance »

This is a good point actually. I think it would be useful to know why we are taking different unit choices within the Revision listing as opposed to the current AB choices.

I'll move this topic over...........
Locked