Re: Magic: The Alternative

Me <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Jasper Overman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > wxforecaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > There is simply no way in H E double hockey stick that someone with
such a
> > > poor concept of the game as a whole, what goes into R&D, and strategy
> >  could
> > > be a level 1 DCI judge, plain and simple. I got a migrane after
reading a
> > > mere 3 paragraphs of this bull sh-t. I'm open to knew ideas, but wow,
it's
> > > like you've never played the game, let alone go through the
painstaking
> > > process of working your way up to becoming a Level 1 judge. Even worse
is
> > > SMMTs reply. Use a spell checker man! 12 typos in the first two
paragraphs
> > > alone. Please please tell me that English is not your native language.
> > >
> >
> > Hmm, let those without sin throw the first stone.
> > Your use of "H E double hockey stick" had me baffled for a while, it
took
> > quite some effort to understand. Hell is IMNSHO an acceptable word in
> > English writing. Strangely enough, your whole first sentence does appear
to
> > be grammatically correct, while I have no idea what it's supposed to
mean.
> > Then again, Migraine is spelled incorrectly, as is bullshit. That
sentence
> > also contains a grammatical error; it is 'reading mere 3 paragraphs' or
'a
> > mere paragraph'.
> >
> > That said, let's not turn this newsgroup in a grammar & spelling class.
Any
> > understandable writing is acceptable, as long as the post is on-topic.
Your
> > post clearly isn't, since you don't give your opinion about his
proposal,
> > which is very on-topic for this newsgroup. ( It's also total and utter
crap,
> > but that's another point... )
>
> If you don't like the ideas I'm proposing, please give specific, clear
> reasons why you dislike them. I don't want this thread turning into a
> flame war. If you're not going to explain exactly why you like or
> dislike the project, take your post to another thread. Thank you.
>
The idea won't work, because one of biggest reasons magic is a great game
for the past 10 years is the continuously adaptation of new ideas and
concepts. You need a skilled team of trained professionals to make such a
game, and that's exactly what wizards R&D is. Yes, it can be improved upon,
yes, some of your ideas have merit, but if you fail to see these points
 and your whole post starts out from denying these points) I don't think I
should try to persuade you otherwise.

> And as far as wxforecaster's message goes, SMMT, while his English may
> be horrific, has been the only one to explain his view of the project
> in detail. If you read my response to his response, you will see that
> I give some reasons for the changes I made. Perhaps most important is
> the elaboration of the strategy involved in the new combat system.
> Please fully read my post and my response to SMMT's post before
> replying to this thread.

I've taken it in consideration, and decided I'd still answer here, and not
read your whole original post.


Jasper