Article on Assassin

Richard,
   Hate to disappoint, but from my experience playing under GSI, the correct words are "my way or the highway". They act like they did build a perfect game. I even tried making an example at a gaming show (a gencon one year) where playing the corsairs, I had 8 characters assassinated in the same hex in the same army with 6000+ troops and a huge number of ships over a period of 3 turns, and several of them were guarded by 40+ agents right after "guards were doubled" and the answer I got was Well, your luck sucked. You wont get satisfaction from GSI, there is none to be gotten. Never mind the fact that assassination is non existent in ME, never mind the fact that whole nations economies can be destroyed by 4 guys in cloaks, and never mind the fact that an agent can walk into Lorien, and assassinate Galadriel while she is sitting in her home looking into her mirror...That GSI for ya. Sucks, but these arguments have been made to them for, what, 8? 9 years? Customer satisfaction is not what they have ever been about. I am happy that Harlequin has made the changes that they did. Special games were non existent...the only time those happened is when games became absurd and DS started assassinating DS and FP started infing away FP.

-Ken

···

From: "Richard DEVEREUX" <rd@pagan-47.fsnet.co.uk>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:35:15 +0100

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: GearonSkywalker
  To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 4:10 AM
  Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

  For my 2 cents on this...

  Agents and Agent nations are by far the best to play. IMHO

  I have been the Cloud Lord and LOST Jindur on Turn 5 to a dragon
  encounter while with an army...but still able to make something of a
  KILLER group of thugs and have my nation place in the top three when
  our side finally won.

  Recently I have been in 2 FA games and have made strong Agent nations
  with both FP and DSers. Of course the DS and 60 As with +20 knp/ass
  are much better than what a FP could easily put in the field.

  Agent nations if well protected from army attacks can in fact help
  armies do better in the field (Poof, where did that enemy army go),
  they can help EMIs do their INFOTHR job...which is all an EMI is good
  for after the POP limit is hit...AND Agents can wipe mages up all
  over Middle Earth if any old curses squad lands in the same hex.

  Now I am not trying to join any debate on what is what...but I do
  have to speak up for the inherent strengths that Agents have...as
  they stand out so much more than any CHAR class alone or combined for
  that matter. IMHO :wink:

  Gary

  That is EXACTLY why I oppose agents being so powerful: under ME rules agent powers reach absurd heights. Not only can they raid a nation's treasury despite all the obvious precautions that any ruler and his servants would take, but a company can carry out up to NINE assassinations per turn, and will cut thru any guards who intervene.
  This is totally absurd: nowhere in history or myth are NINE ssassinations carried out simultaneously.

  I drop the argument that the rules favour the DS: the agent rules permitting the above are a nonsense, regardless of allegiance.

  I agree with a previous contributor who said he disagreed with making a rule against something just because a rule was being abused. It is up to the rule-maker to come up with rules which are not open to abuse, and to amend the rules if they are abused.

  ME is a brilliant game but that does not mean that it can't be improved. The steam engine was a brilliant invention, it still works, and it still has a romance about it; but it is not as efficient as the latest trains in France or Japan (forget the UK).

  There has been no shortage of suggestions for rule changes/improvements but all GSI bring out is 4th Age, with no rule changes, a couple of rules bolted-on to the old framework and a few different artis thrown in.

  This shows nothing but contempt for the consumer. I am almost as angry at GSI as I am at the current Labour govenment whose contempt for the electorate is even worse. Better stop there!

  Richard.

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Richard,
     Hate to disappoint, but from my experience playing under GSI, the correct
  words are "my way or the highway". They act like they did build a perfect
  game. I even tried making an example at a gaming show (a gencon one year)
  where playing the corsairs, I had 8 characters assassinated in the same hex
  in the same army with 6000+ troops and a huge number of ships over a period
  of 3 turns, and several of them were guarded by 40+ agents right after
  "guards were doubled" and the answer I got was Well, your luck sucked. You
  wont get satisfaction from GSI, there is none to be gotten. Never mind the
  fact that assassination is non existent in ME, never mind the fact that
  whole nations economies can be destroyed by 4 guys in cloaks, and never mind
  the fact that an agent can walk into Lorien, and assassinate Galadriel while
  she is sitting in her home looking into her mirror...That GSI for ya.
  Sucks, but these arguments have been made to them for, what, 8? 9 years?
  Customer satisfaction is not what they have ever been about. I am happy
  that Harlequin has made the changes that they did. Special games were non
  existent...the only time those happened is when games became absurd and DS
  started assassinating DS and FP started infing away FP.

  -Ken
  I agree with all the above. It is interesting that this article, which I wrote years ago, has only now sparked such debate. I have only changed my mind on one thing, which is where I said that the agent rules give the DS a massive advantage. They don't; the FP can counter DS agents.

  My point that agents (on either side) - and particularly companies of agents - are too powerful, still stands. I know that Harle can't change this and GSI won't change it. It doesn't stop players having a wish-list of changes that they would like to make, the only formalised one being Laurence Tilley's. It is worth a look even if you disagree with some of the changes he would like to make. You could always start your own!

  However the only way wish-lists have a chance of becoming reality is with a new game.

  Richard.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Kenneth Weed
  To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 2:35 AM
  Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

  >From: "Richard DEVEREUX" <rd@pagan-47.fsnet.co.uk>
  >Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
  >To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
  >Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin
  >Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:35:15 +0100
  >
  >
  > ----- Original Message -----
  > From: GearonSkywalker
  > To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
  > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 4:10 AM
  > Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin
  >
  >
  > For my 2 cents on this...
  >
  > Agents and Agent nations are by far the best to play. IMHO
  >
  > I have been the Cloud Lord and LOST Jindur on Turn 5 to a dragon
  > encounter while with an army...but still able to make something of a
  > KILLER group of thugs and have my nation place in the top three when
  > our side finally won.
  >
  > Recently I have been in 2 FA games and have made strong Agent nations
  > with both FP and DSers. Of course the DS and 60 As with +20 knp/ass
  > are much better than what a FP could easily put in the field.
  >
  > Agent nations if well protected from army attacks can in fact help
  > armies do better in the field (Poof, where did that enemy army go),
  > they can help EMIs do their INFOTHR job...which is all an EMI is good
  > for after the POP limit is hit...AND Agents can wipe mages up all
  > over Middle Earth if any old curses squad lands in the same hex.
  >
  > Now I am not trying to join any debate on what is what...but I do
  > have to speak up for the inherent strengths that Agents have...as
  > they stand out so much more than any CHAR class alone or combined for
  > that matter. IMHO :wink:
  >
  > Gary
  >
  > That is EXACTLY why I oppose agents being so powerful: under ME rules
  >agent powers reach absurd heights. Not only can they raid a nation's
  >treasury despite all the obvious precautions that any ruler and his
  >servants would take, but a company can carry out up to NINE assassinations
  >per turn, and will cut thru any guards who intervene.
  > This is totally absurd: nowhere in history or myth are NINE
  >ssassinations carried out simultaneously.
  >
  > I drop the argument that the rules favour the DS: the agent rules
  >permitting the above are a nonsense, regardless of allegiance.
  >
  > I agree with a previous contributor who said he disagreed with making a
  >rule against something just because a rule was being abused. It is up to
  >the rule-maker to come up with rules which are not open to abuse, and to
  >amend the rules if they are abused.
  >
  > ME is a brilliant game but that does not mean that it can't be improved.
  > The steam engine was a brilliant invention, it still works, and it still
  >has a romance about it; but it is not as efficient as the latest trains in
  >France or Japan (forget the UK).
  >
  > There has been no shortage of suggestions for rule changes/improvements
  >but all GSI bring out is 4th Age, with no rule changes, a couple of rules
  >bolted-on to the old framework and a few different artis thrown in.
  >
  > This shows nothing but contempt for the consumer. I am almost as angry
  >at GSI as I am at the current Labour govenment whose contempt for the
  >electorate is even worse. Better stop there!
  >
  > Richard.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > 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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  >
  >
  >
  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >

  _________________________________________________________________
  MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
  http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/2nded.htm

Laurence G. Tilley

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

···

At 18:38 31/05/2003, Richard DEVEREUX wrote:

  My point that agents (on either side) - and particularly companies of agents - are too powerful, still stands. I know that Harle can't change this and GSI won't change it. It doesn't stop players having a wish-list of changes that they would like to make, the only formalised one being Laurence Tilley's. It is worth a look even if you disagree with some of the changes he would like to make. You could always start your own!

Laurence,

The last time I recall you advertising major revisions to the site
was months ago. Have you redone anything since the last?

Brad

···

--- "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk> wrote

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/2nded.htm

Laurence G. Tilley

______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

No, just plugging the link when the site gets mentioned for the benefit of
newcomers. I consider it as a work more or less finished, but always
consider anybody elses' criticism or fresh ideas. The trouble is that
often people will pick up one bit and ask me to revise it, without looking
at how the overall balance of the 2nd edition would be affected.

This is particularly true of one particular example: the ideas on army
morale, AComm assassination, desertions and the food/gold unit. They were
drawn into a cohesive (IMO) unity from various fragmented ideas first
debated here. Commentators have said they don't like one or other part,
but have rarely proposed a whole raft of linked suggestions which would
address (and consider all the provisos such as internal-consistency and the
complexity trade off):
- The naffness of armies disbanding when their commander dies
- The naffness of the army food arrangements
- The naffness of the army gold cost system
- The unexplored potential of the concept of troop morale
- The naffness of war-materiel movement
Where "naffness" is shorthand for: "'Lack of Internal Consitency' which in
turn is a phrase used to avoid confusion caused by the misunderstanding of
the term "more realistic" and which means that a fantasy world should have
something resembling real world "Natural Laws of
Physics/Economics/Behaviour" and that the presence of magic should not be
used as an easy excuse for weak world or game design.

Laurence G. Tilley

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

At 20:49 31/05/2003, bgb wrote:

--- "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk> wrote

> http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/2nded.htm
>
>
> Laurence G. Tilley

Laurence,

The last time I recall you advertising major revisions to the site
was months ago. Have you redone anything since the last?