Article on Assassin

mepbmlist
#1

From: Gavin Wynford-Jones <GavinWJ@compuserve.com>

Interesting thoughts, Richard.

My suggestions are intended to restore balance to the game

There never was any to begin with...

I agree with the StlGold remarks 100 per cent. I've sent mail to Clint
about this and he got a weasely reply from GSI which made no sense in the
context of the game rules (as stated), or in "reality". If the gold is at
the nation's capital, then that is the only place at which StlGold should
work. If you allow gold thefts at those pop centres where there is gold
production, then it should be limited to the amount in stores, not the
entire wealth of the nation. GSI, despite what it says in the rules
narration, claims that the gold is constantly being transported all over
the place. Following that path leads to even more ludicrous
possibilities...

Gavin
PS Any idea why your whole article began with "quote brackets"? I began
reading it wondering if I'd missed a previous post. (Unlikely, given the
low level of activity...)

I sent it on - so it had quotes (Richard gave permission).

As for GSI's attitude I think that they want to do a minimum amount of work
(they're both retired now I think or thinking of doing so) but there was
comments about bringing out a new scenario (sometime!):slight_smile:

I think that only major bugs will get fixed although if enough players feel
strongly about it all then I would be happy to champion the case to the US.

Clint

···

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Campaign 2000 is here!
http://www.onelist.com
Discuss your thoughts; get informed at ONElist. See our homepage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

#2

just found this forum, and once again I seem to see people who don't
guard their commanders, don't change commanders to foil a 905/yes,
don't get into the curses game, don't scan nation messages for agent
IDs
complaining about agents...

I'm playing NG in your 1650 game 30 and well, yes, the DS agents have
taken a toll, but it's hardly devastating...

the reason free teams don't win more often is they don't play like
teams, they don't support the front line nations, the front liners
get discouraged and drop...

in 1650, an unmolested NG alone can recruit at 3124, 3024, 2924 and
shovel 1300 troops a turn into the ithil pass, the FK and Dark L can
realistically muster 1200 troops...

I hate seeing rule changes as an antidote for poor play (the whole
militia thing for example) And I absolutely hate the fact that lazy
malcontents got army commanders greater proctection from the 615
order, rahter than greater protection via the 610 order...
a 70+ guard ought to harder to blow through than a 50C is to kill,
but the "army commanders die too easy" whiners fixed that.

I for one want the old agent rules back, but with guard that actually
work, rewarding the players who issue the 610 order.

I'll continue to argue this, but I'm pessimistic of getting anywhere.

Gian

#3

ggiacoppe@aol.com wrote

just found this forum,

(Snipped)

I for one want the old agent rules back, but with guard that actually
work, rewarding the players who issue the 610 order.

I'll continue to argue this, but I'm pessimistic of getting anywhere.
Gian

You won't get anywhere by ranting about it here. You're preaching to
the seagulls. As far as I know the only ones able to alter the rules
are GSI, and they aren't reading this.

I actually agree with most of what you said, but sympathy won't help you
much.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

#4

RD: I too am quite new to this forum, but would like to add my two
penn'orth. Firstly, there is no mention anywhere in Tolkien's writings of
assassins or kidnappers. Therefore, if you want to be true to Tolkien's
writings, there should be NO such characters, still less should there be
mega-powerful agent artifacts!

But agents ARE part of the game, and there ARE powerful agent artifacts out
there. IF this causes an imbalance in the game, it should be redressed.
GSI appear to have attempted to do this by 'tweaking' the agent rules.

Agents were a bloody sight too powerful in the early game, and anything
which redresses that is welcome,

Regards,

Richard.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: <ggiacoppe@aol.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 9:34 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

just found this forum, and once again I seem to see people who don't
guard their commanders, don't change commanders to foil a 905/yes,
don't get into the curses game, don't scan nation messages for agent
IDs
complaining about agents...

I'm playing NG in your 1650 game 30 and well, yes, the DS agents have
taken a toll, but it's hardly devastating...

the reason free teams don't win more often is they don't play like
teams, they don't support the front line nations, the front liners
get discouraged and drop...

in 1650, an unmolested NG alone can recruit at 3124, 3024, 2924 and
shovel 1300 troops a turn into the ithil pass, the FK and Dark L can
realistically muster 1200 troops...

I hate seeing rule changes as an antidote for poor play (the whole
militia thing for example) And I absolutely hate the fact that lazy
malcontents got army commanders greater proctection from the 615
order, rahter than greater protection via the 610 order...
a 70+ guard ought to harder to blow through than a 50C is to kill,
but the "army commanders die too easy" whiners fixed that.

I for one want the old agent rules back, but with guard that actually
work, rewarding the players who issue the 610 order.

I'll continue to argue this, but I'm pessimistic of getting anywhere.

Gian

#5

RD: I too am quite new to this forum, but would like to add my two
penn'orth. Firstly, there is no mention anywhere in Tolkien's

writings of

assassins or kidnappers. Therefore, if you want to be true to

Tolkien's

writings, there should be NO such characters, still less should

there be

mega-powerful agent artifacts!

But agents ARE part of the game, and there ARE powerful agent

artifacts out

there. IF this causes an imbalance in the game, it should be

redressed.

GSI appear to have attempted to do this by 'tweaking' the agent

rules.

Agents were a bloody sight too powerful in the early game, and

anything

which redresses that is welcome,

Regards,

Richard.

to respond.
Murazor in the books can't be killed by men. the Naz were so
powerful that Glorfindel, Elrond and Gandalf together couldn't beat
them in a stand up fight at the ford, they had to resort to a trap.
Sauron could be found as the Necromancer in Dol Guldor. Some things
are introduced to make the game playable... (in the game any of the
Naz is rightly fearful of a 210 from Elrond)

Where in the early game did the DS have a huge agent autokill going?
the cloud lord doesn't always start with a 40A in his capital, and
realistically only Din Ohtar (with stacked artifacts) and Ji Indur
are capable of a 615 without training or a hell of a lucky roll.
(and Ji needs to be careful of his targets)

The agent edge is just an easier tool for the DS to use than the vast
economic superiority the freeps have. In the games I've played as
freeps - four, we won all four and maintained momentum the entire
game... I think the DS have a better complaint on the economic
issues than the freeps have on agents. In the many more games I've
played as DS, the agents are useful but not determinative - they help
but don't win the game.

G

#6

RD: According to all the stats I've seen, the DS win more often than the FP.
Therefore, if you have won 4 games on the trot as FP, you may consider that
you and your team have played better than the the opposition. Or, you may
consider that the DS played crap, take your pick!

The reasons the DS usually win are :
1) agents
2) dragons
3) most of the neutrals are 'weighted' so that they are better off joining
the DS, so most of them do just that.
4) it's more fun to play a baddie, so the DS attract more experienced
players.
Not necessarily in that order.

You are absolutely right that it takes time for the DS agent (and dragon)
advantage to tell. The challenge (in the 1650 scenario at least) is for the
FP to make the best use of their economic advantage at game start by killing
one or two DS nations within the first 10 turns, thereby negating factors
1-3 listed above. With good team play, it is easier for the DS to hold out
until factors 1-3 come into play than it is for the FP to eliminate any DS
nations early on.

Regarding who can kill who in challenge, Tolkien is deliberately
inconsistent. Gandalf, Sauron and the Balrog were all Maiar (lesser gods)
but Tolkien only allows Gandalf to kill the Balrog. The whole point of the
trilogy was to allow the little guy, Frodo, to save the world. It would
have been much shorter (and less interesting!) if Gandalf had simply slain
Sauron in single combat (or vice versa).

In the LoR trilogy, Gandalf and Elrond were very careful NOT to challenge
enemy characters unless they absolutely had to (eg Gandalf v Balrog). But
note that in 'Silmarillion' Gil-galad (Noldo elf) and Elendil (mere mortal
man) slew Sauron (or at least his physical body) in the last fight of the
Second Age (altho they died too), and Isildur Elendil's son cut the One Ring
from Sauron's hand (and survived). The original Glorfindel killed a Balrog
in single combat (altho he died doing so). Luthien (elf-girl) and Huan (her
dog!) defeated Sauron. Luthien and Beren (mere mortal man) went on to chop
a Simaril from Morgoth's crown (Morgoth being Sauron's master and a damn
sight more powerful).

Tolkien allowed heroes to triumph against great odds as it suited the
storyline. GSI have done a good job reflecting this in the unpredictability
of challenges, which gives the little guy a chance (however small) of
killing the big bully. The best laugh I had for a long time was when in a
recent game Din Ohtar, loaded with artifacts, visited the Northmen capital
with orders to challenge a new emissary and assassinate the army commander.
The emissary won! And she was only a girl!

No wonder most Noldo players are suitably (and realistically) careful NOT to
challenge with Elrond.

Regards,

Richard.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: <ggiacoppe@aol.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2000 1:47 AM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

> RD: I too am quite new to this forum, but would like to add my two
> penn'orth. Firstly, there is no mention anywhere in Tolkien's
writings of
> assassins or kidnappers. Therefore, if you want to be true to
Tolkien's
> writings, there should be NO such characters, still less should
there be
> mega-powerful agent artifacts!
>
> But agents ARE part of the game, and there ARE powerful agent
artifacts out
> there. IF this causes an imbalance in the game, it should be
redressed.
> GSI appear to have attempted to do this by 'tweaking' the agent
rules.
>
> Agents were a bloody sight too powerful in the early game, and
anything
> which redresses that is welcome,
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard.

to respond.
Murazor in the books can't be killed by men. the Naz were so
powerful that Glorfindel, Elrond and Gandalf together couldn't beat
them in a stand up fight at the ford, they had to resort to a trap.
Sauron could be found as the Necromancer in Dol Guldor. Some things
are introduced to make the game playable... (in the game any of the
Naz is rightly fearful of a 210 from Elrond)

Where in the early game did the DS have a huge agent autokill going?
the cloud lord doesn't always start with a 40A in his capital, and
realistically only Din Ohtar (with stacked artifacts) and Ji Indur
are capable of a 615 without training or a hell of a lucky roll.
(and Ji needs to be careful of his targets)

The agent edge is just an easier tool for the DS to use than the vast
economic superiority the freeps have. In the games I've played as
freeps - four, we won all four and maintained momentum the entire
game... I think the DS have a better complaint on the economic
issues than the freeps have on agents. In the many more games I've
played as DS, the agents are useful but not determinative - they help
but don't win the game.

G

#7

RD: According to all the stats I've seen, the DS win more often

than
the FP.

Therefore, if you have won 4 games on the trot as FP, you may

consider that

you and your team have played better than the the opposition. Or,

you may

consider that the DS played crap, take your pick!

The reasons the DS usually win are :
1) agents
2) dragons
3) most of the neutrals are 'weighted' so that they are better off

joining

the DS, so most of them do just that.
4) it's more fun to play a baddie, so the DS attract more

experienced

players.
Not necessarily in that order.

You are absolutely right that it takes time for the DS agent (and

dragon)

advantage to tell. The challenge (in the 1650 scenario at least)

is
for the

FP to make the best use of their economic advantage at game start

by
killing

one or two DS nations within the first 10 turns, thereby negating

factors

1-3 listed above. With good team play, it is easier for the DS to

hold out

until factors 1-3 come into play than it is for the FP to eliminate

any DS

nations early on.

Regarding who can kill who in challenge, Tolkien is deliberately
inconsistent. Gandalf, Sauron and the Balrog were all Maiar

(lesser
gods)

but Tolkien only allows Gandalf to kill the Balrog. The whole

point
of the

trilogy was to allow the little guy, Frodo, to save the world. It

would

have been much shorter (and less interesting!) if Gandalf had

simply
slain

Sauron in single combat (or vice versa).

Richard.

My reasoning on the four victories inthe four games as freep are
simple.
1) Grudge games
2) Solid grudge teams (any of the Aussies from the US vs AUS game run
by SFGA know what our team was like)
3) preassigned neutrals

(not all 4 had preassigned neuts but 2 or 3 did)

A coordinated and willing to sacrifice freep team should almost
always
win, and can turn the agent game into a plus for them, crash the
market, keep it crashed and steal gold from the DS (esp. the cloud
lord) to try and prevent them naming characters... 690 does come
before the 7xx orders...

The trick as a DS team is to avoid the economic strangulation the
free
can do...

but this is not a teaching forum <g> and I'll probably regret saying
this when we start round 2 of the world games...

just a quick note on the idea of agents don't fit in at all...
wasn't Bilbo hired as a "burglar"?

G

#8

I'd love to see an article on market manipulation including crashing the
market for Bree. Anyone up to that?

In the UK it feels like the more experienced players (and team orientated)
ones go for the DS which might indicate the results over here. I guess that
the intense team game is quite different to the normal game of ME though
which ME was more designed for. Like I said before - I would like to see
what happens with the agent changes over here in the way games go.

Clint

···

A coordinated and willing to sacrifice freep team should almost
always
win, and can turn the agent game into a plus for them, crash the
market, keep it crashed and steal gold from the DS (esp. the cloud
lord) to try and prevent them naming characters... 690 does come
before the 7xx orders...

The trick as a DS team is to avoid the economic strangulation the
free
can do...

#9

RD: Yes he was (see 'The Hobbit'), but he had no experience or training.
His only qualification was that Gandalf (Tolkien) picked him because he
wanted to turn a fat, lazy slob of a hobbit into a hero. In fact Bilbo
should have died very early - except he was lucky enough to find the One
Ring which made him invisible.

I agree there is no mention of assassins in Tolkien, but they do add to the
game, and it is quite logical that the DS would employ them. Come to that,
some of the FP were just as ruthless, cunning and underhand as the DS, so
why not?

Richard.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: <ggiacoppe@aol.com>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 2:28 AM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

> RD: According to all the stats I've seen, the DS win more often
than
the FP.
> Therefore, if you have won 4 games on the trot as FP, you may
consider that
> you and your team have played better than the the opposition. Or,
you may
> consider that the DS played crap, take your pick!
>
> The reasons the DS usually win are :
> 1) agents
> 2) dragons
> 3) most of the neutrals are 'weighted' so that they are better off
joining
> the DS, so most of them do just that.
> 4) it's more fun to play a baddie, so the DS attract more
experienced
> players.
> Not necessarily in that order.
>
> You are absolutely right that it takes time for the DS agent (and
dragon)
> advantage to tell. The challenge (in the 1650 scenario at least)
is
for the
> FP to make the best use of their economic advantage at game start
by
killing
> one or two DS nations within the first 10 turns, thereby negating
factors
> 1-3 listed above. With good team play, it is easier for the DS to
hold out
> until factors 1-3 come into play than it is for the FP to eliminate
any DS
> nations early on.
>
> Regarding who can kill who in challenge, Tolkien is deliberately
> inconsistent. Gandalf, Sauron and the Balrog were all Maiar
(lesser
gods)
> but Tolkien only allows Gandalf to kill the Balrog. The whole
point
of the
> trilogy was to allow the little guy, Frodo, to save the world. It
would
> have been much shorter (and less interesting!) if Gandalf had
simply
slain
> Sauron in single combat (or vice versa).

> Richard.

My reasoning on the four victories inthe four games as freep are
simple.
1) Grudge games
2) Solid grudge teams (any of the Aussies from the US vs AUS game run
by SFGA know what our team was like)
3) preassigned neutrals

(not all 4 had preassigned neuts but 2 or 3 did)

A coordinated and willing to sacrifice freep team should almost
always
win, and can turn the agent game into a plus for them, crash the
market, keep it crashed and steal gold from the DS (esp. the cloud
lord) to try and prevent them naming characters... 690 does come
before the 7xx orders...

The trick as a DS team is to avoid the economic strangulation the
free
can do...

but this is not a teaching forum <g> and I'll probably regret saying
this when we start round 2 of the world games...

just a quick note on the idea of agents don't fit in at all...
wasn't Bilbo hired as a "burglar"?

G

#10

He's far from fat and lazy. He's an everyman. He represents the simple
fellow who would rather stay at home. He enjoys the simple things in
life. On his deathbed Thorin Oakenshield tells him that the world would
be a better place if his values were held by more, above the alternative
- hoarded gold.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote

Gandalf (Tolkien) picked him because he
wanted to turn a fat, lazy slob of a hobbit into a hero.

#11

Noooooooooooo! Such an article already exists, and is in circulation,
but those of us who have a copy don't want the whole world to have it.
This is like asking for Grandma's Secret Recipe.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote

I'd love to see an article on market manipulation including crashing the
market for Bree. Anyone up to that?

#12

Yep Just read the old volumes of "Mouth of Sauron" I believe it was Tom Walton that did the piece.

Henning

···

----- Original Message -----
From: Laurence G. Tilley <laurence@lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Article on Assassin

Harlequin Games <pbm@harlequingames.com> wrote
>I'd love to see an article on market manipulation including crashing the
>market for Bree. Anyone up to that?
Noooooooooooo! Such an article already exists, and is in circulation,
but those of us who have a copy don't want the whole world to have it.
This is like asking for Grandma's Secret Recipe.

#13

>Gandalf (Tolkien) picked him because he
>wanted to turn a fat, lazy slob of a hobbit into a hero.
He's far from fat and lazy. He's an everyman. He represents the simple
fellow who would rather stay at home. He enjoys the simple things in
life. On his deathbed Thorin Oakenshield tells him that the world would
be a better place if his values were held by more, above the alternative
- hoarded gold.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley

RD: Gosh Laurence, it must be Sunday if your going all moralistic on us.
You're right about Thorin's dying words. But it didn't stop Bilbo filling
his saddlebags with treasure so he could live in comfort if not luxury when
he got home. Any fool can enjoy the simple things in life when they have
plenty of money! And when the money ran out, he retired to Imladris and
ponced off the Elves. Me, cynical? Nah.

Regards,

Richard.

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best friends, most artistic, class clown Find 'em here:
http://click.egroups.com/1/4054/9//430399//960124470/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

#14

He wrote "There and Back Again" while he was there. A worthy task, not
lazy - surely you don't begrudge him his comfortable retirement.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote

And when the money ran out, he retired to Imladris and
ponced off the Elves.

#15

RD: Of course not. If I wasn't playing games in my leisure time, I'd
probably be writing too.

Richard.

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote
>And when the money ran out, he retired to Imladris and
>ponced off the Elves.
He wrote "There and Back Again" while he was there. A worthy task, not
lazy - surely you don't begrudge him his comfortable retirement.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/