Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: "(Ryan Smith)" <SnakeIzBac@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Deck and card posting replies - or not
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:24:55 EDT
In a message dated 98-07-17 14:10:23 EDT, you write:

<< Several people were annoyed that nobody or too few people responded to
their deck postings and card ideas.
>From my experience I must say that it is very difficult to give an
accurate criticism of a deck without having played it; few mistakes in a
deck concept jump out at a mere reading. I try to play posted decks when
the opportunity arises, and then I give my comment from actual game
experience. This might take one or the other week.
I´ve seen a lot of fictional card postings recently (duh!), which isn´t
bad at all as such. I´m just getting weary trying to read, analyze, and
criticise seemingly dozens of card ideas every evening. I´ve caught
myself skipping card idea posts recently, but I can´t think of a better
way to organize these messages. Perhaps someone can help me there.Honestly
said, it discourages me a little to think of so many good and/or
creative ideas disappearing in some dark corner of a storage bank.
On the other hand, brainstorming and discussion and vastly too many
ideas are needed to make a good SRTCG expansion. I´m carrying the idea
to compile a Germany or Europe expansion myself, and several friends
have agreed to contribute to this, but I will wait until the Amerindian
expansion goes into its final stages to start posting that one.
>>


Felix I can't agree with you anymore. yes, I too find it difficult rating and
critiquing someone's deck. It's really tough trying to read all of these
cards. There are a lot of bright ideas here, but i admit myself i don't read
everything here.

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.