ORIGINAL: KG Erwin
Goblin, my friend, you were asked to look these over, and you said no. You're my friend, but you have just closed the door on playing a part in testing these OOBs by an outside observer. What does this tell me? Simply that you, amongst others, have predetermined that you will not like the changes no matter how well-researched or thought-out they are.
As a moderator, this is confusing and disappointing. Nevertheless, discussion is encouraged. We're all concerned about the same thing, but are just disagreeing on the way to go about it. You guys are doing well, and keeping this discussion on a civil level. That's all that I ask for. Otherwise, have at it.
Well researched and thought out?!!?!?!?!?!?!?! Did you read what you typed?
I will tell you now why I turned you down. We were asked to review the OOB's while playtesting MCSE, and report mistakes. I did. I played 3 campaigns for 40+ battles, all with armor, and was told that my findings on the track-busting MG's were not what others were finding, I must be wrong. Other reported it also. I and others reported the nuclear bazookas, etc etc etc. All of it must have been mistakes, and it was all 'right'.
After I really turned up the emails, I was then invited to help refine the errors before release. Great! I spent craploads of my time finding and reporting errors. During all of this, the rest of the MCSE team was not even allowed to see the OOB's after their revisions. Then I get an email saying 'sorry about it, its all final and turned in'. Hmmm. It was only my time.
After wasting all of that time, They come out like they did, with the errors and more.
Now you want me to go round two?
I'm not an idiot.
Goblin
