There is a penalty - that’s why… 
If you drop then you count as losing the game (even if the team then goes onto win) for the purposes of the PRS. Is that what you mean?
Clint
Clint,
With all due respect, when we’ve been hearing on one hand that “a drop is counted as a loss” and on the other hand, Sam Roads has been listed on the top of the PRS standings (Nazgul) with 7 games played, 7 wins, and 2 drops since the very beginning, what, exactly, are players supposed to think about what they’re told?
Brad Brunet
Amen.
The sad, simple truth is that many MEPBM players are unwilling to treat each other with respect and common courtesy. Too often it’s “I’m taking my ball and going home!” in a snit, rather than acting like a decent human being.
If you don’t know how to have fun while going under, while doing your best to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, while playing, then I’m willing to wager you don’t really enjoy the games you do win. (A sense of superiority or bloated self-worth isn’t genuine and certainly isn’t lasting.)
In the end, you’re paying to play, so why not play? Strategize, wage war and treat your fellow players as they deserve. You’ll enjoy your game no matter how you or your team fares.
(Of course, the people who could most benefit from reading this thread probably won’t ever see it.)
Brad, I don’t think Clint’s Boss will enjoy this sudden demotion from 100% Nazgul to only a 78% Nazgul. Perhaps a little ‘catch-up’ is going on here.
Hi just thought I would toss in my 2 cents. Ive enjoyed this thread.
a) Gunboat games last longer because limited communication and information makes collective dropping difficult to coordinate and certainty of loss difficult to get.
b) Politeness is a major factor. The game is social by nature (at least to be effective) and taking 10 or 15 strangers/gamers and putting them together seems like a natural equation for some tension. American Iron you referred back to the heady days of roleplaying in highschool and I can definitely say that I sure as heck wouldn’t want to play this game with any random set of those guys. For me at least roleplaying could only ever work when I could pick to play with my friends. What that means for this game is hard to say. I know I have been trying to get my friends to play this but its a hard sell.
c) I agree that new/tweaked scenarios would add to the mystery and thereby have a good shot at leading to longer games because the true nature of the situation wouldn’t be known. Near perfect information naturally leads to more prediction on the part of the player. For those who play warcraft or other online RTS wargames, it is a familiar phenomenon that players will spar during the opening and one player or another will quit because he knows he is outclassed or has lost the advantage and doesnt think he can reclaim it. If I were to romanticize this, I would hearken back to samurai fighting duels and never having a swordstroke because one realizes that the other is outclassing him on stance and stare alone. If the game were less known and ritualized (by which I mean openings are largely predictable) then people would be less certain of the outcome early on.
For my two cents,
It seems in an open set up game, its alot harder to get people to go the extra mile if things start to take a turn for the worse. While the game may not be lost, it is still recoverable but alot of players can get sort of a “defeatist” atitude and while not necessarily give up they start to play with a serious lack of enthuisiasm. It usually takes someone on the team to step up and coordinate a turn or two of action to get everyone interested again. If that happens then the game usually goes the distance, if it doesnt then you start seeing a few drops here and there and then its over in 10-15 turns.
In the Grudge Team aspect, I’ve played with some veterans who insisted the game was lost by T5 and called for a drop. Yet, on other teams, we’ve played until we’ve been seriously beaten, because this game can take some very drastic turns the longer it goes on. I, for one like to go the extra mile, as the saying goes…a brilliant defense is the sign of a great general…although I have yet to play a brilliant defense…so draw your own conclusions!! :> But, I guess the point is, over time I have gravitated to like minded players.
I am still undecided if the PRS is a factor. I havent seen any real evidence of it except in one game and that game is pretty unique in its circumstances so it really isnt a good test subject. But, point is, someone will always point to something as the issue…its the PRS, its the price, its the problems with the scenarios etc etc etc. when in the end, I think the real issue is simply that you have to deal with people, some like to quit quickly because they make a simple mistake…others dont mind trying to recover from a mistake. Seems to me that there are more people playing the game now than there was a few years ago…more people, more droppers??
-Fletch
“With all due respect, when we’ve been hearing on one hand that “a drop is counted as a loss” and on the other hand, Sam Roads has been listed on the top of the PRS standings (Nazgul) with 7 games played, 7 wins, and 2 drops since the very beginning, what, exactly, are players supposed to think about what they’re told?”
For clarity there’s several different ratings. With the Maia, Istari etc they count as loss and so your rating is reduced appropriately. For the Nazgul it’s just a record of win/played/drop. For completeness we added the drop so that players could see exactly what the situation there was and then judge accordingly.
As usual Ed has hit the nail squarely on the foot… Hope the above clarifies the different ratings and why they are represented slightly differently.
Clint
Clint - I’m very confused by your statement above. Here’s what your web page that describes PRS says about the Nazgul rating:
Nowhere does it mention drops being a “loss”. And a look at the actual ratings shows that drops are not counted as a loss for the purposes of computing Nazgul (e.g. Sam Roads: 7 games 7 wins 2 drops, 100% nazgul)
I also searched for “drop” on the web page and it’s only mentioned a couple of times under valar, but as i interpret that section, the mentions aren’t germaine to this discussion as they relate to how you score the team’s score to affect the valar rating when you have a dropped player on your team.
So how again is a drop penalized as a loss? doesn’t seem to me like it is. If it is, you should perhaps clarify the documentation so that people understand it is a loss and how that’s treated.
thanks,
Dave
As Alice said ‘curiouser and curiouser’. Having for the first time actually studied the Nazgul rankings, I see some names (sans drops) that I beleive have dropped. One fellow is particularly vivid. The instant I gave him Tharbad (at his request) he quit. It was a darn bother getting the pop center back again.
If memory serves Clint has dropped one or two (maybe more?) times and those are not listed.
We only started the dropped and GWCs/Badges from a certain point before that dropped nations didn’t count; you’re talking about game 52 where for the benefit of the game I decided that it best if I not play on. So I hope that explains your curiouser comment to your satisfaction.
Dave - I am a bit confused - I’ve explained where the drop doesn’t count for Nazgul rating in my earlier email - is that unclear? If not please explain to me how I can make it more clear.
For the Maia, Vala etc rating dropping out counts directly as a loss as explained in my earlier email.
Thanks
Clint
There is a penalty - that’s why…
Clint
The problem is that the statement above is clearly untrue. Personally, I think it would be both easier for yourself AND more accurate as far as ALL the PRS categories go, if you simply counted drops as losses for all. That way, when you say the above, you don’t have to worry about picky people like myself and others callling you on every single syllable.
Brad Brunet
If any of the 700+ players decided for the benefit of the game, their allies, their wife’s credit card, their bosses demands of overtime, or their peaceful vacation, to drop a game, they’d have it counted as a Loss (2/3).
Just being picky, but you must realize that these types of things can only fester. My advice, make the simplest rules possible and follow them as closely as possible. As GM’s who also play, you’re very well aware that a subset of your clientel take Extra issue with many of these types of things. Any perception of subjectivity coming into play to your perceived benefit will only lead to negative publicity, ranting, etc.
Brad Brunet
Wow, it’s too bad this degenerated into yet another “I hate the company, wah, wah!” thread. I understand some of you are so helplessly bitter at the percieved injustices inflicted upon you by the demonic and evil regime, but this thread is about acting like adults and coming together to enjoy MEPBM.
Be respectful and generous to everyone who plays, both in the game and here on the board, whether they’re novices, veterans, poor communicators, selfish, helpful, GM’s, or talking monkeys.
Perhaps these unwritten practices (that amount to policy) should be formalized for all to see.
It is clear the old days of players fighting it out , in the late game, 3 on 3 or 4 on 3, or even 1 on 1 will never return. It is OK, I guess, those who are not Olde Tymers have never experienced it and you don’t miss what you don’t know.
What unwritten practices are you talking about???
Having been playing the game since I first bought my rulebook at GenCon (was it Origins-GenCon that year?) over a decade ago, I do understand your frustrations. I merely expect adults to rise above petty frustration and enjoy the game as it is. Nothing stays in stasis; cultures change, general expectations alter, the game moves on as well.
If you’re going to campaign as a vocal rabid minority, have the simple human decency to do so in your own thread: I imagine Douglas Scholz is less than pleased with what his impassioned appeal to the generous and better side of the MEPBM playerbase has become.
Thanks for reading, see you in game 
Gringo, I respect you and your postings. As my entry said it was not all inclusive. I addressed the items that I felt were controlable by the Company. Human nature is beyond Doug’s, yours or my control. If it is not politically correct to discuss Company policy, I guess I had better shut up.
Friends,
Well it has run it's course hasn't it. I had stated that I felt like a time had passed and was doing so in a wistful way. Kinda like two old men on a lazy summer night when the first cold dew of Autum is closing in remembering when times were better and the world bigger. :) I don't have issue with the company at all. I actually have found them to be OK with me. I also don't give a hoot about the ratings system. I don't need someone else to tell me whether I'm good a this or not. Just as long as I'm having fun at it. Now the more goal orientated people who need recognition might like it and if they do then I say cool let's do it. I was just wishing that the games would last longer...... I have fun playing them and very often my team mates become friends to me. I also find that I miss them once the game is over. But like all things life marches by. I posted this thread just to see if others missed the long game too. I guess some others do. I never meant for this to be a sound board for soap box standers. I'm going to be bowing out of this thread now as I feel it no longer is moving in the direction it was set on. Thank you all for writing and your thoughts. I hope to be playing you all again. Until then keep on giving more then your getting. :p
Big-Doug…Done
Well I hope you weren’t referring to my posts. No wah wah there, re-read them if you have to.
I’ve been quite a vocal proponent of the company on various forums and egroups in the past and quite often argue against much of the conspiracy theories posted elsewhere by other participants of this thread. Please no blanket accusations among mature, literate, and well-informed adults. Thanks.
Doug, I appreciate and muchly agree with your sentiment. I’m too new to have personal experience with the game style that is rued by yourself, Ed, and Gringo. I’m glad many of your “generation” are still about and participating.
Brad Brunet
“when… drop a game, they’d have it counted as a Loss .”
Note I dropped game 52 before the ratings come up so it’s not on the records nor did we ask players for that information. (To get a rough rating we asked for win/loss). Note I actually counted as a loss for game 52 as my Eothraim nation was wiped out and the game ended after the ratings started … 
(Bah!) Ironic uh?!
I agree that it’s turned into Ed’s attack the company and me thread again. Bit bored of that. We haven’t got any unpublished policies; we occasionally makes mistakes clarifying some things, but that’s something different. Also I am very proactive in trying to chat to you guys to see where we can change things. (The initial drop games was added to the Nazgul rating, and the original Nazgul rating was a player idea in the first place for example).
Sometimes players don’t like the input I put in, sorry that’s annoyed a couple of players, but feedback seems to be generally positive so for now I’ll continue to be here, take the flak, and see where we can improve the game for the majority of the players.
Trying to get it back on line. Hopefully I’ve put forward some reasons and potential changes we can implement to the game to make the game last longer. I’m all for competitive games towards the end - there’s some interesting games of Gunboat that have lasted a long time for example (game 74 is on turn 42 for example with 5 v 5 at present so those games do happen and a few on 30+ turns).
Normal ongoing games: game 2 is on turn 59; game 86 on turn 34; game 221 on turn 39. The only real difference I can see is the diplomacy/team- spirit that as soon as a set back does occur players aren’t always able to deal with that and drop and what makes those games last longer is team-spirit I think. I make strenuous efforts at game start to make sure the teams are roughly even and then it’s upto you guys to fight it out.
Without pick-ups I think the games would end a LOT quicker. Makes commonsense to me (less players on one side, therefore more likely that others will feel the enemy attacks and lack of fun, therefore more likely they drop out ad infinitum.)
New Module concept - I’m presently looking for players to feed into the history for that and start a discussion group. If you are interested then get back to me. I am pretty sure that such a game (well as sure as I can be without it existing, but Bofa pretty much fits our design concept and others that we have done as well) would fit lots of the critieria that Douglas is looking for. 1000 I’m looking to change the set-up if that’s what players want to see if we can get a more balanced game there; balance = longer games I’d say.
Thoughts welcome.
Clint