- Sorry, but four new troop types simply means it's not DBA anymore.
David, can I please suggest you stop pirating the DBA name and that you and the WADBAG team demonstrate your faith in your work and publish your NEW RULESET under a proper NEW NAME and stop trying to con peope that it's DBA.
--- In DBA@yahoogroups.com, kuijt <kuijt@...> wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:58:44 -0000, "Mark walters"
> <comitesalani@...> wrote:
> > Anyone know what the four extra troop types were? Is the 8Bw type
> > mentioned the same as DK's(?) Pavisier rule on Fanaticus?
> Hi Mark,
> Yes, lots of people know what the four extra troop types were, but we
> would really prefer that you contain your interest until we release our
> Beta version for public comment, in the moderately near future.
> The 8Bw type is in most respects the same as the Pavisier rule up on
> Fanaticus, yes. Although I've been given credit for it, and I've been a
> longtime advocate for it, I am not the only person who worked on it.
---In DBA@yahoogroups.com, <pc.barker@...> wrote :
They could instead play the official DBA 3.0 which we sweated blood over and is a much better set.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
One advantage to an informal negotiated settlement changing the name from "DBA 2.2+" is that the very act of negotiating would appear to lower the tension, leading to further mutual accommodation later on. They already tell people to buy the 2.2 rules as a prerequisite to playing "2.2+" (that's why I bought John Curry's book). If you guys got back on speaking terms again, maybe they would be willing to encourage people to buy 3.0, and to play both. What am I overlooking here?