Prev: RE: Infantry Walkers Next: Re: Infantry Walkers

re: /gzg/list: codes

From: tom.anderson@a...
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 17:36:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: re: /gzg/list: codes

first off, i think mr martin's suggestion is an excellent one, and i for
one will use it.

now i can simply skip that immense thread on 'can i mount this on my APC
in sg2' as i personally do not play sg2 and so could not care less,
whilst others i am sure will find it riveting.

just seperating the list + subject tokens and the true subject allows
confusion with non-coded messages, so might i advocate the use of
slashes as i have done? sorry to introduce an incompatible version
'upgrade' at so early a stage :-).

so, fyi+afaik, you might see such things as:

/gzg/ft2: pulse torpedo query
/gzg/xt: thruster pushes revisited
/gzg/ft: naming UN ships
/gzg/ds2: weapon proposal
/gzg/sg2: killing power armour
/gzg/b5: painting narn ships
/gzg/fh: political status of madagascar
/gzg/ot: space wombles
/gzg/list: revision 3.7 of Martin codes

is 'extra thrust' actually the name for the rules in the fleet book? is
this indeed what you were referring to? if not, we should put 'fb', for
'fleet book'.

the gzg/ft message applies to all versions of full thrust (even ft1, for
those who remeber it!).

i have abbreviated 'future history' to 'fh'.

is this right?

we might even subdivide at some point: if we keep coming back to the UN
(its organisation, role, reraltionships with other powers - there's a
lot to it), we might put /gzg/fh/un, but i hope this day will be a long
time coming :-).

i would say that, to contain proliferation of subjects, messages should
be assigned to a game where at all possible.

andrew - how about being the referee on this and writing up a little
instruction sheet?

Tom

Prev: RE: Infantry Walkers Next: Re: Infantry Walkers