What happened is that GSI will not give the source codes to Harley. My speculation is that GSI believes that Harley will make the game into something that it is not. Minor tinkering with the combat modifiers is one thing. Changing the intent of the game is something else. Stassun and Feilds are justly proud of their baby, it is a great game. Someone, for example, who does not understand the moralistic base of the game will turn it into another ‘off the shelf’ computer game.
My speculation is that GSI believes that Harley will make the game into something that it is not.
I think that’s giving GSI way too much credit. From where I sit, they’re just living off the fruits of their effort 10 years ago, without doing anything to improve it. Heck, they don’t even bother to actually run games anymore!
As to the “moralistic” base of the game, I’m not sure I follow. The original design of the game practically has the two sides fighting each other as much as they fight their enemies. That’s why you can dislike an ally and take all his pop centers with emmys and kill his characters. Fortunately (I would argue), the game has evolved into more of a standard wargame that is more clearly moralistic than the back-stabbing morass that is the first draft.
Let me suggest the game was intended to be a’back stabbing morass". It was NOT intended to be a standard wargame. In the struggle between Good and Evil we are all given temptations and moral choices. This is a Free Will morality play. A level, among many, this game possesses.
I don’t see the Nazgul singing union songs linked arm in arm, and I certainly don’t believe many of us remember much inter racial cooperation amongst the so-called Free People in any of the books.
Let’s see, the Noldo pissed off the Sinda from the beginning, age old vows and hatred there. I believe there was the time the Dwarves of Belegost were slaughtered by some more Noldo, can’t quite recall if the Dwarves started it…of course, the Dwarves of Noegrod wouldn’t come to the aid of Belegost, so there are Dwarven “city-states” feuding… Much of man, originally all “Easterlings” until the “West” slithered into the sea, followed Morgoth and then Sauron. The Dunedain were the worst of the mercantilist colonialists when they happened over into Umbar, until Isildur and company - they were the supposed righteous Dunedain, and look what happened to selfish and vain him?
While the game “play” has “generally” evolved into a more standard war game where teamwork is essential, I wouldn’t equate the socialistic utopian ideal of self sacrifice for the benefit of the team as “moral” necessarily. And we don’t need fantastical Middle Earth stories to tell us why…
I think the 4th age scenario adequately puts the back stabbing morass back into the game…to many players, the icon means simply is a means to an end…better emis, commanders, agents, or mages…and placing starting popc’s in mountains or not…
I do like the combat modifiers and such for troop types and I agree that in 1650 and 2950 the nations should get a troop type that is fitting their national design and the significance of the troops as evidenced in the books.
For my money anymore, I’ll play a variant where things are shaken up a bit…like the WOTR I’m in now, I’ll play a neut in 1650 and do whatever the >>>>> I want…or I’ll play 4th age and join up with a few buds and declare war on the world…which has been done in my game 44 btw, three alliances and several undecided neuts to start the game…interesting if nothing else.
I like the freedom of 4th age nation design and I like that everyone basically starts out the same, give or take…I have yet to play a Kingdom, for now…
but I’d love to see 2nd ed rules game…but from what I’ve read it won’t happen.
so my next question is…and uh oh it’s off topic…does anyone play another war game like this via email? Any for modern day warfare???
I have some desire to play something else as well as the Middle Earth scenario but can’t locate anything as well moderated or organized on the web.
my two cents and the 50 dollars as a tip,
JMR
Let me suggest the game was intended to be a’back stabbing morass". It was NOT intended to be a standard wargame. In the struggle between Good and Evil we are all given temptations and moral choices. This is a Free Will morality play. A level, among many, this game possesses.
No doubt. I took your statement more on the “good vs evil” level than what you meant. Still, I prefer what it has become over what it started out as (and this coming from a regular Diplomacy player).
While the game “play” has “generally” evolved into a more standard war game where teamwork is essential, I wouldn’t equate the socialistic utopian ideal of self sacrifice for the benefit of the team as “moral” necessarily. And we don’t need fantastical Middle Earth stories to tell us why…
Why do I get the feeling I just got called a commie? 
Actually, I didn’t mean anything like that. The books do have the sides warring against each other, but I prefer the game where it’s team vs team.
so my next question is…and uh oh it’s off topic…does anyone play another war game like this via email? Any for modern day warfare???
Check out flyingbuffalo.com - they run Battle Plan (and a 1939 variant) that is more modern. I played a while ago, and it was fun.