LOL – what she doesn’t know won’t hurt me 
– was stupid enough to leave the credit card bill lying around – won’t happen again !!
Mike
Hey now that you mention the Alliance game – does Clint plan on doing another – if so sign me up !!
Upto you guys. If you want it then that’s fine. First I’ve heard though so as usual I need around 12 interested parties. Interested doesn’t mean ; " when my current game ends, then if the Grudge game doesn’t set -up then I might sign up for this." 
Clint (GM)
That’s how I join most of my games! :eek:
Regards Herman
yeah Ed, you are oh so mean :rolleyes:
it might be true that some americans were superior when the licence fusioned, but mostly because you guys had a few more years of experience under your belt. I guess this has been evened out by now.
and what exactly has MEGAMES done to destroy your mighty ruses?
as you are so keen on military examples: what would happen if you put up a squad of soldiers who cooperate like a clockwork against one where everyone primarily minds his own business? the game has evolved and the succesful style is dominant. everybody is entitled not to like that and measures can be taken to simulate the old times. but your mantra that this was the “true game” gets boring…
Okay. After looking over the restoration discussion, I am going to float a really stupid idea.
Back in the old GSI days, I would get my turn by mail and I would send my orders by mail.
With a two week game, I could expect to get my results in four to six days and figure it would take as long for my orders to arrive. So, out of fourteen days, I could figure on eight to twelve for transit and six to two for communication. In those days, by phone. Even six would be awkward, considering time differences and schedule differences. More often, it would be closer to the two. With the effect of time zone difference, and work shift differences, that could get really tight.
I spent a fair amount on over night mail – absolutely guaranteed, except for from my area, then look at two or three days – or faxed orders, to the point where it made sense, in conjunction with business needs, to buy a fax machine [this was back when my county was progressive in buying a fax machine – one fax machine for all county operations].
So: re-institute, as a choice, play by mail. Turn results come by mail. Orders are submitted by mail. No other choice. No e-mail, no fax.
With other players, whatever communication you can do – e-mail, ansible, whatever.
But turns come and go by mail. No other option.
In the GSI Miami days that meant discussions had to be fast and furious. These days, for folks in Oz, Middle Earth (Kiwis) and Hong Kong, it would be a big problem. But, of course, solve one big problem, create another.
Move fast, or die.
Do I like this idea: no
Even with the fastest mail, do I think it can work between the states and Cardiff for anything other than a three week game: no
But it is half way back to the good old days.
We cannot shut down the internet. But it can be arranged that you cannot submit or receive turns other than by mail.
And if no one likes it, no hair off my head.
And, I repeat, I think this is a really stupid idea.
But, since it has not been floated, have at it.
That’s essentially what “forcing” the game to a web app would do. It would restrict the medium in which you dealt. And you’re arguing for speeding up the game (2-6 days - makes a 1 weeker slow) as you have X time per turn.
Players would still communicate via email and coordinate as such - excepting there wouldn’t be file sharing. My webapp had file sharing only for Friendly nations of the same allegiance.
Players would still communicate their “blind” turns, to return, in less than 7 days.
etc.
Now, contrasting the 2 ideas - force the game to mail vs force the game to a restricted arena, what about yours do you hate…? Mail? Buying stamps? The down-time waiting for the mail? The fast play-time (not game time)? No file sharing?
Brad
Brad
Fair enough.
Except I am not arguing for anything.
I posed an idea I do not like.
Somewhat as a reminder, somewhat, perhaps, to broaden horizions.
I try to be helpfull. It does not always work the way I would like. I figure the fault is mine.
Brad,
I think the whole basic idea I described is bad.
I liked the way things were.
That is gone.
I thought I was pointing out how far gone.
Frankly, I think any attempt to force things back to the the way they were is doomed. I thought the absurdity of what I described would convey that. But, perhaps, it does not look absurd to others,
Being up in years, and having learned that I like and do what I like and do because it is what I like and do, I have learned that I do not like changes in those things.
But I have grown to accept the changes that the internet has brought to the play of Middle Earth.
It is still fun.
If there are other ways to configure the game that make Middle Earth Games enough money, which means enough players, good. I do not see that as a realistic result. If I am wrong, it will not be the first time, and probably not the last.
@ caradoc
I think the key is not how you get your turns in and out. the key is inter-player communication and efficiency. there is a whole bunch of consequences that result from tools like:
- yahoogroups
- input aids and order checkers
- data bases
- this forum
many of the circumstances that made out the “old game” simply were individual shortcomings of players: lack of communication, knowledge and organization, missed turns, anonymity. the community was not as cohesive as it is today. with the option of the forum, players who are unreliable and tend to drop out are stigmatized much faster as they would have been in the old days. so there was a whole load of players that did not communicate and did not have access to vital information and did not care to drop as much as one would today. this was all to the benefit of the “sharks in the pool”, who made the extra effort. all the tools mentioned above have opened the ability to play effective to a wider range of players. so one could safely say that the overall quality of gameplay has improved over the years. this results in faster games - there we are again.
but it would be a misconception to think that teamplay wasn’t effective and that there were no fast games in the olde days. in 1992 I had a team of friends playing the game. we used to meet every friday before due date. we beat our opposition as FP by turn 10. the game hasn’t changed, but the way that it is played.
I would definitely enjoy another alliance game… just waiting for the current one to end… LOL
I would definitely enjoy another alliance game… just waiting for the current one to end… LOL
Terry your starting to stutter – posted same message twice
Starting…?
Starting…?
Well , yes – how does one go about posting the exact same message on the boards , did he write it out twice ??
Oh and why wait – lets try to get one going now !!
It’s not me really… It’s the computer! Or it’s the sight…
It’s not me really… It’s the computer! Or it’s the sight…:eek:
1000 2wk [Game 48]: 15 nations available 2/8
Please sign up
Clint
You missed out on the last one… but be prepared for the game to go long… It’s a blast though… definitely the closest variant to getting back to the old days… Just one nation and the Fog of war and only your limited map to guide you… Gifts of gold are rare to be prepared to fight alone…
The niciest part you really have a great shot at of challenging some of the really high scores without the slight taint that gun boat games do to inflate the nation ratings… Of course you still have to be on the winning side… it’s truly the best variant I have played in so far to recapture the roots of ME Games.
[i]1000 2wk [Game 48]: 15 nations available 2/8
Please sign up [/i]
You need to get in touch directly. I don’t take sign-ups on here as I’ve found that they don’t actually equate to players actually signing up… 
Clint
I’m already signed up. I was encouraging others to sign up.