> Maybe, with the benefit of hindsight, if we could go right back to
I agree with you on this. Though it's nice to have a range of ships to choose
from, from a background sense it would have been better to have the 4 major
nations, with the rest buying stuff from the Big Four (with maybe a small
number of unique designs or custom modifications).
---
I actually have to disagree, I think that the wide range of styles is a huge
selling/marketing point in GZG's favor and undoubtedly keeps the
sculptors "fresh" as well since if they get tired of one thing they can move
to another.
> about it? Would you rather have everything tied down to "official"
Yes. I think if you do this and add a note that "Of course you caan use any
mini you want for any force--if you think our FSE tanks are better as
NSL and vice versa, go right ahead, just tell your opponents!", that would be
quite sufficient for anyone. And I suspect you'd sell more tanks if you had
national TOEs and specific minis for each nation.
You don't have to tell your opponents, provided that you decal all of your
vehicles with the appropriate national markings, which I'm sure that Decals
Express would be happy to provide.
Ok, enough of my shameless plugging...
J
> about it? Would you rather have everything tied down to "official"
> On Apr 22, 2007, at 6:33 PM, John Lerchey wrote:
> You don't have to tell your opponents, provided that you decal all
So any plans of doing the UN Flag?
> On Apr 22, 2007, at 6:33 PM, John Lerchey wrote:
It's already done, and has been available for some time! Look in the FT decals
section of our webstore.....
> On Apr 22, 2007, at 11:54 PM, Ground Zero Games wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2007, at 6:33 PM, John Lerchey wrote:
Gee I missed those. What size are they?
We make a UNSC flag set. You can order it directly through DE
(wge@speakeasy.net) or through Jon if you're in the UK.:)
I've started work on a set of vehicle markers - based on the flag sets,
but lower visibility (black or white). I won't have them ready until Jon
approves them though.:)
John
> [quoted text omitted]
> On Apr 22, 2007, at 6:33 PM, John Lerchey wrote: