FS 6/12

mepbmlist
#1

Hi,

FLAGSHIP 100 has recently come out.

At the risk of being a bit of a nerd, Clint missed out the 2001 Flagship ratings for Middle Earth. :slight_smile: The full picture for the last three years is shown below ...

Ratings out of 10; Anticipation (A), GM (G), Depth (D, Interaction (I),
Value for Money (V) #Votes [#}

2000 A8.02 G8.26 D6.88 I7.98 V6.79 #42
2001 A8.29 G8.39 D7.24 I7.70 V6.90 #43
2002 A7.80 G8.18 D7.68 I7.90 V6.80 #76

From a non-corporate viewpoint, I find it interesting that the Value for Money figure has remained more or less consistant despite the rise in prices earlier this year. Perhaps some of the views expressed when this happened aren't actually that representative? I'd agree with Clint that the rise of the Depth figure may well be due to the variants, though a cynic could also point to some of the other very popular PBeMs out there, by comparison to which MEPBM compares very favourably in terms of depth. It would have been interesting to see a Depth figure for Legends, but it looks like Legends players don't vote. :frowning:

GM rating is pretty good for a comp mod game (the really high GM ratings usually go to GMs of hand and mixed moderated games) - for instance Harlequin's game "Exile" won it's GM a rating of 9.33 (the second highest score in the whole poll). The only thing I don't understand is the drop in anticipation - this, with the comparatively low Value for Money, cost MEPBM the title of Best Wargame (it won last year). Maybe next year? :slight_smile:

Colin

#2

Colin Forbes wrote:

highest score in the whole poll). The only thing I don't understand is
the drop in anticipation - this, with the comparatively low Value for
Money, cost MEPBM the title of Best Wargame (it won last year). Maybe
next year? :slight_smile:

Colin, for those of us whodon't subscribe, could you post a summary of the rating for ME and its category?

聽聽聽聽jason

路路路

--
Jason Bennett, jasonab@acm.org
E pur si muove!

#3

Thanks Colin - can't find the issue (stored by the arcane workings of John's mind no doubt).

At the risk of being a bit of a nerd, Clint missed out the 2001 Flagship
ratings for Middle Earth. :slight_smile: The full picture for the last three years
is shown below ...

Ratings out of 10; Anticipation (A), GM (G), Depth (D, Interaction (I),
Value for Money (V) #Votes [#]

2000 A8.02 G8.26 D6.88 I7.98 V6.79 #42
2001 A8.29 G8.39 D7.24 I7.70 V6.90 #43
2002 A7.80 G8.18 D7.68 I7.90 V6.80 #76

From a non-corporate viewpoint, I find it interesting that the Value
for Money figure has remained more or less consistant despite the rise
in prices earlier this year. Perhaps some of the views expressed when
this happened aren't actually that representative?

*** :slight_smile:

I'd agree with Clint
that the rise of the Depth figure may well be due to the variants,
though a cynic could also point to some of the other very popular PBeMs
out there, by comparison to which MEPBM compares very favourably in
terms of depth.

*** Yes - as a player I am still surprised how such an apparently simple game as Middle Earth has such a depth of play.

It would have been interesting to see a Depth figure for
Legends, but it looks like Legends players don't vote. :frowning:

*** From playing it and having GMed it a little I would say 9.5 for Legends - it rightly deserves it's "most complex" wargame "title"! Don't play it if you want to have a hard time but if you want a rewarding game and like working the game then it's great. The only reason I don't play it right now is time.

GM rating is pretty good for a comp mod game (the really high GM ratings
usually go to GMs of hand and mixed moderated games) - for instance
Harlequin's game "Exile" won it's GM a rating of 9.33 (the second
highest score in the whole poll).

*** We're very happy with the GM rating! Constantly in the 8s is fine with us.

The only thing I don't understand is
the drop in anticipation - this, with the comparatively low Value for
Money, cost MEPBM the title of Best Wargame (it won last year). Maybe
next year? :slight_smile:

** Nor me... :frowning: Still overall very happy and thanks to the 1% of our players who did vote. Very much appreciated.

Clint

#4

So who won the free prize from flag-ship for voting ? Was it really a
burger-king voucher then ?!?

I'm a little shocked by the dropped in Anticipation as well. 2 weeks
is already too long to wait for the next turn! :slight_smile:

I did however vote low on the value for money. I'm in way too many
positions (It was 8 positions last week but now it's 7!). Yes I know
it's my fault and that no one twisted my arm but I was hoping that by
generating that amount of cash each month, that a small discount by
running over X number of positions. I fear it might be slightly
unworkable though.

Something that I saw other pbm companies do was giving a discount
when a person credited their account with a large amount at once. I
guess sort of like a discount for buying in bulk type. For example,
if you credit your account with XXX quids then you'll get an
additional X% added to your account as a bonus or X number of free
turns ?

Perhaps another idea might be to pay in advance for a game ?
Difficult to design as the game might run for 10 turns or 20 turns or
50 turns....
For example, Let's say you pay for 20 turns in advance...then you'd
get X number of turns free. (Similiar to paying 10 quid when starting
a new game that you get 2 turns free....except this time it's in
bulk). If the game ends before the 20 turns then I guess the
difference would need to be refunded.....however if the player drops
before the 20 turns then I would think the player shouldn't get a
refund. It might be one method to stop players dropping positions....
(albeit a very harsh method).

Anyway, just some ideas to mull over which could perhaps get the
Value for Money higher next year ? Any other ideas of squeezing more
blood out of the proverbial stone that is called Clint ? :slight_smile:

Cheers
Brendan

Thanks Colin - can't find the issue (stored by the arcane workings

of

John's mind no doubt).

>At the risk of being a bit of a nerd, Clint missed out the 2001

Flagship

>ratings for Middle Earth. :slight_smile: The full picture for the last three

years

>is shown below ...
>
>Ratings out of 10; Anticipation (A), GM (G), Depth (D, Interaction

(I),

>Value for Money (V) #Votes [#]
>
>2000 A8.02 G8.26 D6.88 I7.98 V6.79 #42
>2001 A8.29 G8.39 D7.24 I7.70 V6.90 #43
>2002 A7.80 G8.18 D7.68 I7.90 V6.80 #76
>
> From a non-corporate viewpoint, I find it interesting that the

Value

>for Money figure has remained more or less consistant despite the

rise

>in prices earlier this year. Perhaps some of the views expressed

when

>this happened aren't actually that representative?

*** :slight_smile:

>I'd agree with Clint
>that the rise of the Depth figure may well be due to the variants,
>though a cynic could also point to some of the other very popular

PBeMs

>out there, by comparison to which MEPBM compares very favourably in
>terms of depth.

*** Yes - as a player I am still surprised how such an apparently

simple

game as Middle Earth has such a depth of play.

> It would have been interesting to see a Depth figure for
>Legends, but it looks like Legends players don't vote. :frowning:

*** From playing it and having GMed it a little I would say 9.5 for

Legends

- it rightly deserves it's "most complex" wargame "title"! Don't

play it

if you want to have a hard time but if you want a rewarding game

and like

working the game then it's great. The only reason I don't play it

right

now is time.

>GM rating is pretty good for a comp mod game (the really high GM

ratings

>usually go to GMs of hand and mixed moderated games) - for instance
>Harlequin's game "Exile" won it's GM a rating of 9.33 (the second
>highest score in the whole poll).

*** We're very happy with the GM rating! Constantly in the 8s is

fine with us.

> The only thing I don't understand is
>the drop in anticipation - this, with the comparatively low Value

for

>Money, cost MEPBM the title of Best Wargame (it won last year).

Maybe

>next year? :slight_smile:

** Nor me... :frowning: Still overall very happy and thanks to the 1% of

our

路路路

players who did vote. Very much appreciated.

Clint

#5

So who won the free prize from flag-ship for voting ? Was it really a
burger-king voucher then ?!?

** A few players claimed the prize. :slight_smile: Upto them if they want to tell - wasn't very exciting! :slight_smile: I had some cards from Cadbury's special white choc promotion from NZ (available to those with brothers in the business) but felt that it wasn't that great a prize.

I'm a little shocked by the dropped in Anticipation as well. 2 weeks
is already too long to wait for the next turn! :slight_smile:

I did however vote low on the value for money. I'm in way too many
positions (It was 8 positions last week but now it's 7!). Yes I know
it's my fault and that no one twisted my arm but I was hoping that by
generating that amount of cash each month, that a small discount by
running over X number of positions. I fear it might be slightly
unworkable though.

*** We try to keep it straight across the board for everyone. Not sure how to reward player loyalty - it's something that I can look at in the future as we aren't able to make any more changes to the accounts program (it's over-run by a year for creating all the bits and pieces as it is). I am interested in hearing what you voted if you wanted to make it public (or in touch just with me off-list).

Something that I saw other pbm companies do was giving a discount
when a person credited their account with a large amount at once.

** Yes, if you don't mind I think this is awful. We tried it once but didn't like it. It didn't appreciably encourage players to send us more money, and for those that could afford it, it just saved them money. Ie we lost money! :slight_smile: I know players want cheaper turns, always do, but we have to make a living or the game goes bust. As it has for 6 companies running the game - they've all passed it on or just dropped out. I think players consistently over-estimate how much money we earn here. I used to pay 拢15 for my Serm Ral turn - it was that enjoyable, I'd spend a week creating my turn enjoying the intricacies of it all. Legends players pay 拢12 regularly, mad yes! But enjoyable. I love PBM it's cool. 拢4.50 is not a lot of money for the hours of entertainment and stimulation it provides. Note the VFM stayed pretty much stable. Anticipation is the one that changed - I guess we're too clockwork... :slight_smile:

Perhaps another idea might be to pay in advance for a game ?

** This came up before - if you get stuffed then you're not going to be happy. You can have refunds though to help out but I don't see that helps other than committing you to a game. Then we'd have to judge when a player dropped what type and if it's open to refunds... :slight_smile:

It might be one method to stop players dropping positions....
(albeit a very harsh method).

*** Not so many drops in the game as there were. And we find that there are a number of pick-ups for them as well.

Anyway, just some ideas to mull over which could perhaps get the
Value for Money higher next year ? Any other ideas of squeezing more
blood out of the proverbial stone that is called Clint ? :slight_smile:

.... or the proverbial players... :slight_smile: Could do with a new Jag... :slight_smile: or a car at all... Sam has a 15 year old beat up burgundy Fiesta, John beats him with a spanking "new" 13 year old Fiesta (dent in the passenger door); the others of us don't own a car... :slight_smile: Last year I got myself a TV licence.... and none of us can afford a haircut (Ed got his cut in the pub by a woman for a dare - what you do for lus... love!). Stu picked up sticks to move to the UK etc.

I am happy with this, love PBM, but do have a family to look after.

We often see companies with new games come on the market, ask too little for their product and end up a year or two later leave for pastures new. We're looking at reducing the prices in the future a little - the more players that use AM (and Meow when it comes out) the cheaper we can run the business (with less errors, and faster, easier turn creation but they're asides) the more benefits for players. We're not perfect, but I think we're pretty decent over-all.

Future plans include looking to expand the player base to the public at large, Wargamers in particular - that takes money, luck, time and expertise. We've got some of it... :slight_smile:

Clint

#6

Game 70 is filling fast. I expect it to be the last game to get filled before Christmas - so if you want a game to take to your Aunt Nellies to cogitate over whilst the family play Charades then this is your best bet. We need 10 more...

Clint