The best thing you can do at this point then Mike, is to use the Contact
Form on the AvP website and tell them exactly that.

The same for everyone else who feels this way, also.

- A

Michael Everson wrote:
>
>
> Ditto what Marcus said. I have been contemplating a Buy 2 Get 1 Free
> purchase when Cassino, France 1940, and Kursk are all eventually
> published, but my enthusiasm is beginning to wane. So many other
> exciting games and gaming systems are being published that I may look
> elsewhere for a tactical system that I can actually have a chance to
> play with someone else.
>
> Mike
>
> --- On *Tue, 7/14/09, Marcus Bertman /<marcus.bertman@gmail.com>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Marcus Bertman <marcus.bertman@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [panzer_grenadier] Re: VASSAL Solution
> To: panzer_grenadier@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2009, 8:18 AM
>
> I am pretty sure that this issue has been brought to their
> attention both on Consim, Boardgame Geek, other forums and
> probably through other channels as well. Obviously without result.
> But from my experience, companies usually become very attentive
> only when enough customers start talking the language of money. My
> perspective regarding Panzergrenadier these days is simple - over
> last 8 years I've bought six main modules and about the same
> number of supplements; I have played perhaps 10-15 games during
> that time, mainly because my wargaming buddies are quite lukewarm
> about the ruleset (ASL grognards refusing to see the light :-). I
> like the ruleset, but at the same time I have enough gaming
> material to last me a lifetime and very few opportunities to play.
> So unless I get additional incentive in form of possibility to
> play online, AvP will not be selling anymore of their PzG products
> to me.
>
> With regards
> Marcus B.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 1:07 AM, Mike NotSpecified
> <blockhead@bresnan. net
> <http://us.mc598.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=blockhead@bresnan.net>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Haven't we beaten this dead horse before? I detect not the
> slightest hint of
> interest from APL.
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:22:44 -0700
> Doug Cooley <doug666@comcast. net
> <http://us.mc598.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=doug666%40comcast.net>>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jul 13, 2009, at 3:02 AM, David Jackson wrote:
> >
> >> What is your solution for the VASSAL problem?
> >>
> >> And can we solve it with something other than VASSAL?
> >>
> >> I'd still prefer if AvP release a module, and kept it out
> of the
> >> hands of a single individual, who might have an agenda and
> might
> >> exploit that.
> >
> > I've already suggested a cut-down EFD package that APL would
> (obviously)
> >need to approve, along with the reasons why I felt it would
> be successful in
> >both demonstrating to APL how valuable allowing modules would
> be (and that
> >may mean that it backs their claims of rampant theft) as well
> as how
> >grateful customers would be to have them.
> >
> > VASSAL is really the only good solution for reasons already
> mentioned
> > (cross-platform, allows use of real-time play which is
> critical to PG
> > because of Op Fire interaction, etc). APL is not going to
> take any risks in
> >the near future on a Days of Wonder model (also already
> proposed back before
> >the move/Cassino debacles) although I still think that would
> be the best fit
> >for them.
> >
> > In a free society you can never prevent individuals from
> finding ways to
> >subvert the system, right or wrong. What APL can do is bless
> a module that
> >can be distributed freely, and even control the online source
> if they chose
> >to by making it available through their website. The risk is
> always there
> >that someone will expand the EFD package I mentioned above to
> include all
> >scenarios and all nationalities, but that risk already exists
> and doesn't
> >change anything.
> >
> > My guess is that someone reading this list knows of an EFD
> package that's
> >already in existence (not me, sadly). If we had that in
> place, it's a simple
> >matter to start a discussion with APL, remove the necessary
> materials to
> >make it acceptable to them (assuming they find it acceptable,
> which could
> >happen) and submit it to them for final approval and
> placement on the APL
> >website. If no one was willing to come forward (and I would
> happily act as a
> >go between in this process to protect anonymity, and not take
> credit for the
> >module), someone would need to start from scratch. However,
> if we all helped
> >out by providing countersheet scans, breaking up of the
> countersheets into
> > individual counters, etc, it might make for a nice project
> and a way for
> >this list to give back to the community.
> >
> > Of course, all is for naught if APL refuses to consider the
> project and
> >that's probably the best place to start. If there's someone
> who has a good
> >relationship with any of the APL staff, that's who I'd have
> float the
> >proposal.
> >
> > Doug
>
>
>
>
>
>