Deliver us...

mepbmlist
#1

In a message dated 09/11/2002 13:03:08 GMT Standard Time,
mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com writes:

As a self-confessed newbie, I have been following the thread regarding new
players and powerful nations with increasing melancholy. Why? Well, from my
perspective, catalysed by recent experience, I have come to the conclusion
that an elitist subculture pervades the game. Newbies are to be tolerated,
not encouraged or fostered.

If I have read the postings correctly, and I freely admit that this is a
generalisation that should not be ascribed to all, the experienced players
argue that newbies should be given quiet backwaters to run as otherwise they
can, and often do, deminish the experienced players enjoyment of the game.

Although I can understand this argument, and sympathise with it even, it
still saddens me greatly. Can't these experienced players remember what is
was like to be a newbie? Is winning sooo important to these players? Has the
desire to win subsumed the altruistic ideals of the game? And will this
desire become even more prevalent when the rating system is introduced? Will
powerful nations be denied to newbies, only to be given to players with high
ratings?

Questions... questions...

I can't remember who said it earlier in the thread, but isn't MEPBM designed
to be a team game? Surely a new player can be effective and contributory in
any position - if given sage advice and encouragement by his fellow players?
And if experienced players cannot be bothered to provide such advice and
nurturing, then should the newbie be scapegoated for the failings of the
team? In my experience, the latter is certainly true.

Mike Absolom

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

#2

MAbsolom@AOL.com wrote:

I can't remember who said it earlier in the thread, but isn't MEPBM designed to be a team game? Surely a new player can be effective and contributory in any position - if given sage advice and encouragement
by his fellow players? And if experienced players cannot be bothered
to provide such advice and nurturing, then should the newbie be
scapegoated for the failings of the team? In my experience, the
latter is certainly true.

In any team game, it's important to balance teaching new people how to play with making sure the experienced players enjoy the game. While I enjoy helping new people learn, I don't want to spend $100+ watching a new player flail around with a powerful position, only to hand the other team an easy victory. You also have to remember that not all new players are as attentive as you.

I enjoy playing board games with a group that meets once a week, and occasionally they'll pull out a game I don't know. The one thing I know I don't want in any new game is the heavy, powerful units, because I can't employ them properly. I'm much better off taking the frigates or what not and watching the other guys employ their units well. I'll be less frustrated, they'll be less frustrated, and everyone will learn and enjoy.

I understand why you might think some players are elitist. I suspect they come across that way because they've been burned by inexperienced players who couldn't handle their position, and couldn't learn quickly enough.

There's also the question of who's really running a nation when a new player takes a powerful position. There's no point in giving the new guy the Noldo if someone else is going to practically write his orders for him. Better to give him Cardolan, let him makes some sub-par moves, and learn from the experience.

I remember my first game quite clearly, and frankly I'm very glad I didn't have North Gondor or the Noldo to manage. I would have done a crappy job and gotten very frustrated. Heck, I waited several games to play the Noldo (2950), and STILL did a crappy job!

I hope this answers your questions. Maybe we'll get to play together sometime....

      jason

#3

--- MAbsolom@AOL.com wrote:

I have come to the conclusion that an elitist
subculture pervades the game. Newbies are to be
tolerated, not encouraged or fostered.

Very much true.

Can't these experienced players remember what is
was like to be a newbie?

Most of the time, obviously not.

Is winning sooo important to these players?

Problem being definition of "fun" for each, as, quite
frankly, the game costs money. If it was football in
the yard on Wednesday afternoon, maybe not so much.

Has the desire to win subsumed the altruistic ideals
of the game?

What were they, exactly?

And will this desire become even more prevalent when
the rating system is introduced?

People are already concerned about the individual winner
re: Victory Points. Many of your "elite" like to claim
it's a totally American problem, as the old American
company used to give free turns, etc, to the individual
winner. BUT - I've had more than my share of both
Europeans AND newbies (who shouldn't remember the old
GMC's...) speak to me about VP's in our games... There
will be no change to the competitive urges in players.

Will powerful nations be denied to newbies, only to be
given to players with high ratings?

Official line is to attempt to balance the "teams" by
ensuring they're relatively equal total experience wise.
This is also tempered with an official document that
attempts to "steer" newbies clear of crucial nations.

Good for the one newbie vs good for the other 24 players
vs good for the game. If it came down to a vote, ALL
people of rational mind must side with the established,
veteran, repeat-customer demand. Can't give away the
store to strangers, but once they've proven themselves
to pay their bill and return, maybe advance them a little
credit, no?

The facts are that a high percentage of people try the
game and leave, often early in their first "mistaken"
go at it. More often than not, an inexperienced player
will reduce the effectiveness of the nation, ANY nation.
It's like that in ANYTHING in the world. Why reduce
the pleasure of the majority to please someone who may
not even be a customer anyway?

I can't remember who said it earlier in the thread,
but isn't MEPBM designed to be a team game? Surely a
new player can be effective and contributory in any
position - if given sage advice and encouragement by
his fellow players?

Of course. But you're hoping for:
1) friendly veterans willing and able
2) newbie actually willing to listen (more rare than you
   might believe...)
3) newbie actually becomes a player making it worthwhile

And if experienced players cannot be bothered to provide
such advice and nurturing, then should the newbie be
scapegoated for the failings of the team?

Most definitely not. But why must we find fault at all?
One team won, the other (in pc terms..:wink: "almost" won.. :wink:

In my experience, the latter is certainly true.

Mike Absolom

Don't get me wrong, I'm not riding newbies or attacking your
points. I'm simply responding with my Veteran and Experienced
view on how things are, maybe providing a different angle to
look at these issues from. I personally do everything in my
power to help newbies, from our team yahoogroups to private
email, info files I've packed together, directions to web
sites, ideas, advice, etc. I enjoy the game immensely and
like playing with others who are eager, interested, and most
importantly, have a sense of humour (perspective..?).

But people are people all over and you'll find people in all
walks of life who are just grumpy. Go figure. You'll also
find many people who simply do not have the time to dedicate
to mentoring and nurturing. They play their games, they play
them well, and when they communicate to their allies they
will do so in as brief a manner as possible, because many
frankly haven't the time to write the annoying novella's I
seem to. Can't fault the busy vet if the newbie doesn't
understand the shorthand....

Brad

···

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

#4

As a self-confessed newbie, I have been following the thread regarding new
players and powerful nations with increasing melancholy. Why? Well, from my
perspective, catalysed by recent experience, I have come to the conclusion
that an elitist subculture pervades the game. Newbies are to be tolerated,
not encouraged or fostered.

*** Due to the intense interaction that occurs in the game every nation is important. Unlike many other PBM games where if you don't interact it's not a problem for the team as a whole, in ME it is essential. It's one of the strengths, and unfortunately one of the weaknesses, of the game.

If I have read the postings correctly, and I freely admit that this is a

generalisation that should not be ascribed to all, the experienced players
argue that newbies should be given quiet backwaters to run as otherwise they
can, and often do, deminish the experienced players enjoyment of the game.

*** There is no quiet backwater nation in the game. Any nation can be played effectively and have an impact on the game. BUT a powerful nation played badly, will have a bigger impact on the game. Normally new players miss turns. This is disastrous for the team in many situations. However, I try to balance the teams in an individual game so that both sides are equal here. There is nothing wrong with the so called backwater nations. It's a shame that players feel that they have to have the most powerful nations to enjoy the game.

Although I can understand this argument, and sympathise with it even, it
still saddens me greatly. Can't these experienced players remember what is
was like to be a newbie? Is winning sooo important to these players? Has the
desire to win subsumed the altruistic ideals of the game? And will this
desire become even more prevalent when the rating system is introduced?

*** I doubt it. Grudge games are the "must win" games... great fun lots of stress, shouting and lots of fun... :slight_smile:

Will
powerful nations be denied to newbies, only to be given to players with high
ratings?

*** NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! For new players I want to give them the best nations for them to learn with. There is a steep learning curve in the game and making sure that new players don't get swamped with that information is something I want to avoid. If I had a crystal ball that worked I would be able to judge players ability before they set up and then give them an appropriate nation to play. High ratings will have no impact on this. After a player has played (I would advise) a FP and then a DS I would be happy for them to try something more demanding and awkward to play.

I can't remember who said it earlier in the thread, but isn't MEPBM designed

to be a team game?

Me, yes it is.

Surely a new player can be effective and contributory in
any position - if given sage advice and encouragement by his fellow players?

*** Relatively speaking I would say no they can't. The example of playing the Eothraim is one that players use a lot. I have seen that nation played extremely badly, competently but never well with a new player. But Cardolan or similar nations I have seen played well. There are many reasons for this that would take pages of analysis. I would never give a new player the Eothraim - unless they strongly put forward a desire to do so. Even then I would strongly hint back not to do so. Same with many of the nations I have removed from my list of nations to play for new players.

And if experienced players cannot be bothered to provide such advice and
nurturing, then should the newbie be scapegoated for the failings of the
team? In my experience, the latter is certainly true.

*** Unfortunately you have been stung (rightly or wrongly) here. I would guess that both parties are partially wronged and partially guilty. I could go into detail about who and why but I don't think it would help the situation. Best for both parties to put it down to a bad experience and move on. They rarely happen, but do occasionally happen.

Most often new players just drop and are the "guilty" party. Mostly without warning, or only after destroying a nation. (For whatever reasons). This has a majorly detrimental affect on the other 9 players in the team. Sometimes, but more rarely, it is the Experienced players who are more at fault. Note they are not honour bound to provide assistance, but I would certainly advise them to give appropriate levels of assistance. Judging what assistance can be taken on board (200 emails, 24 links to different websites and read all the Mouth of Saurons, won't help most players for example - they'll just get swamped!). Also assistance where it is wanted, a realisation that errors (from new and experienced, but more likely exp. players) will occur whatever happens. A willingness to communicate - try the phone as well if email doesn't work (that means you have to give out your phone number - 99% of players don't on their contact details), and an ability to reign in their desire to win can help - ie keep pressure to a minimum. The new player isn't aware of his "responsibilities" in the game most often, so it's upto the exp. players to help here if they want to.

Having been there myself as new and experienced I try and judge how much information a new player can handle. In game 52 we've mostly got new players on our team (3 experienced the rest in their first couple of games). I try to deal with overall strategy - "troops on turn 4 to 2715 from Dwarves, Eothraim, Sindar, Woodmen" for example and then let the players work out the logistics of it all. It doesn't always work, and for those more keen and anxious to learn more I attempt to provide more assistance. In the past I used to do the write someones turn for them as a "suggestion" but I don't like doing that as they have a tendency not to learn the reasons why. So now I just attempt to offer advice and fit the player's desire into the gameplan.

So that's some advice on dealing with new vs experienced player's problems that do come up.

Clint

#5

That's not true at all. You should however understand that hardened players love this crazy game with a passion, and they approach each game with a will to win. Whilst you'll find most are friendly, and will sit up all night writing patient mails to give a newbie all the help he needs, you should also appreciate that sometimes it gets frustrating. And frustrating in the extreme when the newbie is uncommunicative. The key is in what you say - that it's a team game. When a newbie or gang of newbies do not appreciate this, and want to try a game and shed as much blood, buy as much mithril and assassinate everyone with his A30's as quickly as possible, you will see the hackles rise.

Laurence G. Tilley

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

···

At 00:08 10/11/2002, MAbsolom@AOL.com wrote:

As a self-confessed newbie, I have been following the thread regarding new
players and powerful nations with increasing melancholy. Why? Well, from my
perspective, catalysed by recent experience, I have come to the conclusion
that an elitist subculture pervades the game. Newbies are to be tolerated,
not encouraged or fostered.