|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 18, 2008 2:53:47 GMT -5
BTW Osk...you have a real market with the young...your set is his favorite! You know, Paint, I was having a pretty blah day until reading this...it brought a big smile to my face. I appreciate it. And tell your nephew - thank you for the support!  ~ :-Xsk It's something about those zombies and demons that hooks the youth.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2008 14:42:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by David Morse on Mar 18, 2008 16:44:45 GMT -5
Clearly, the community is divided on which set should release "next," yet no one has said that the decision is likely to impact their purchasing decision. Actually, if you go back to page one of this thread--yeah, I did: The War Games sets were among my favorites, and I liked the concept of the War Games so much that I still run them yearly in my fed (in 2111 now). But I would still prefer the classics sets, and I would buy those for CotG Online in a minute. Since I am currently running two versions of the GWF (my original in 2111 and the classics to fill in the historical gaps), I would love to be able to play them in different ways. I don't need to go back and replay 2087-2093 right now, so I would be a lot less likely to buy the War Games sets again. Not that I am trying to extend this discussion. I am pretty happy with the idea of the classics sets being added to the stat tracker and simulator. While I would rather have them fully implemented, that announcement was very good news. I just wanted to point out that for me, at least, it does impact my purchasing decision, and I had said so previously. That's not attempting to make any sort of threat or anything, but just a statement of fact: I have no wish to replay the War Games years. I'll live either way, and as I said, the addition of EC to simulator is a not a bad compromise. |
|
|
|
Post by LWPD on Mar 18, 2008 18:31:06 GMT -5
|
|
