Chris:
In the past decade, every time I have been defeated it has been by commanders and emissaries NOT by agents. You are speculating in a vacuum. I suspect that you are the opponent I most like to fight. The delicate egos who wilt under pressure. Boy will you get the pressure--and quit to protect a self image. Harley will look after your country, however, and turn it over to a tem mate for rehabilitation.
···
From: "Christopher Engel" <cengel@iegsd.com>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] 1650 - no assassins
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 23:07:21 -0400Game Balance and Game Mechanics are two completely seperate issues. You
can balance almost any sort of mechanics by adjusting the starting
conditions for each player position.The other issue is do the mechanics make for a good game? Obviously what
makes for a good game is a very subjective issue. What some people find
good, other people find very distastefull.
I'm begining to suspect that, despite my love for the subject matter,
the mechanics of this game aren't going to turn out to be my cup of tea.
However, I'm going to at least try playing the game I'm signed up for. I
consider myself a pretty hardcore wargamer and I really can't seem to
get around the fact the actions of single agent (character) can wipe out
an entire army all by themselves... and do so turn after turn.... or
that they can have such a huge effect on the economy of a nation. The
role (in wargames) I've always considered proper for agents has been
pretty much confined to the gathering and denying of intellegence (and
perhaps some minor harrasment of production/economy). Good intellegence
can be a crucialy important factor in wargames... but it augments a
countries millitary capability not replaces it. In ME it sounds
concievable that a country could field absolutely no millitary forces
itself but completely anhililate another countries millitary by having a
number of skilled agents....and thus defend itself millitarly entirely
on the basis of having a half dozen skilled asassins. That's not a
particularly apealling type of game for me.... and I would suggest
nothing more then an exercise in frustration for anyone that enjoys the
aspect of army combat. I suspect this frustration has nothing to do with
getting beat.... as it does with how one got beat. I know in other games
where I've suffered a defeat due to my opponent having a superior
strategy for using thier armies... while I might have been disapointed
in loosing... I could thoroughly appreciate and enjoy HOW I was
defeated.In this game I suspect it would work something more along the lines of
Player doesn't really enjoy/agree with whole agent aspect of game and
therefore doesn't concentrate on it. Player tries to concentrate on
millitary aspect of game, which they enjoy. Opponent pursues agent
strategy which completely nullifies millitary aspect of game. Player
gets frustrated and decides not to continue playing ME since it doesn't
allow them to concentrate on the aspect of the game that they enjoy and
have a chance of being successfull. Of course, I haven't even played
yet... so maybe I'm way off base... but I could totaly see something
like that being the case for me.Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Ricard Pitarque
Sent: Tue 8/13/2002 6:22 PM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Cc:
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] 1650 - no assassinsWhat is sure is that without agents, it is impossible to Stop
Frees Armies
at all, how could Fire King present somewhat of resistance if he
only
recruits 800 HI per turn when Gondor can recruit 1800 HI without
problems??
Even now with assassins games are quite balanced.Ricard.-
----- Original Message -----
From: "GUD" <david_clemmensen@post.tele.dk>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] 1650 - no assassins> I dont belive that that woud be enny fun FP woud win witn no
problem even
if they have to take the long northen road do you thing you cout
out recrute
the EOT / NGo / SGo
>
> david
>
> Colin Forbes <colin@timewyrm.co.uk> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > In a thread entitled "Re: Re: New NKA Forming - suggest some
> >
> > modifications", Clint wrote ...
> >
> > > We run the NKA game and as per usual if there is support
> > we can run
> > games
> > > with no such orders.
> >
> > Now there's a thought: a 1650 game without assassinations,
> > though
> > perhaps allowing kidnappings but not executions? Keeping
> > kidnappings
> > would still preserve the valuable game balancing effect
> > (without any
> > 615/620 orders the DS would probably be stuffed).
> >
> > I'd be on for a game like that - heck, I'd even play the
> > Cloud Lord.
> > Anyone else?
> >
> > Colin
> >
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ---------------------~-->
> > 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/ySSFAA/ofVplB/TM
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------~->
> >
> > Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
> > To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
> > Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
>
> Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
> Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.comYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com