Hi everyone
Been working through your extensive emails on the subject. Firstly no
individual player needs to commit to a team for any length of time. Most
of you have been playing for a while as it is, and no doubt your interest
in ME will be finite but assuming the game continues to run (no doubt it
will), then we can replace players as and when we need to.
As players are unable to commit to a one-week game, or turn up for an
extensive game then there is no quick way of playing I am afraid - but I
don't really see that as a problem. Yes it might be hard to keep a team
committed but on the other hand it is in normal games anyway. If you can't
necessarily play to win at 100% effort that is fine, 90% (or even 10% -
although I would not suggest it) is fine.
A cup would speed things up a little - with five teams it might be
something like double elimination - (ie two losses and you are out).
Getting so that there is a system to encourage a game to end when a team is
lost is also useful (for speed). A further suggestion is that if at any
one turn you have 3x as many players on your team as the opposition you
win. Opinions please? (In addition to a scoring system to help this - we
can come back to that later emails something like Chess or Go scoring might
help here where you challenge a team when you are ready to play and we
update the scoring as time goes on).
(To keep the emails restricted can only team captains reply - and if you
haven't got one please allocate one even if it is just for this. It could
be that your team all thinks alike on a subject, or rather more likely that
some are for one suggestion but not another. Possible as well - in which
case a suggestion is: say something like 4 for this, 5 against, 2
unreplied.)
Opinions please? Then we can go onto the various scoring systems and ways
to encouarge quicker games.
(If you want to be taken out of this list then please say so - I have sent
it to the ME list just in case as well.)
Clint
Opinions please? Then we can go onto the various scoring systems and ways
to encouarge quicker games.
Im not in any game but when I read your mail and knew the problems with a
fast playing PBM, I thought of why you don't re-do the deadline system.
You set a deadline, 1-3 weeks ahead, depending on what you decided.
But if you get the turns in before the deadline, you run the game anyway.
i.e if you recive all the turns on Wednesday and the deadline is Saturday,
your run the game and send it out.
By this you save a few days, give the players the choice when to send in the
turn and save a number of weeks until the game has ended.
Can become a bit stressed though, both for the players (to plan and
coordinate) and for the GM (to check the number of recived turns and process
them when recived)...
Dunno if you whant that kinda game...
RedEyeJoe
Won't work I am afraid - over 50% of our players get their turn on the
process date. Also I have found that it is irrlevant what deadline you do
set as a considerable proportion get theirs turn in as close to the deadline
as possible. (For example I delayed Serim Ral a week whilst I went away and
shock/horror I had 70% of the turns in on the new deadline date - and yet if
it was a ten day turnaround the self same players would get it in on time as
well. Human nature uh! ?
Clint
···
****************************************************
Harlequin Games
mailto: pbm@harlequingames.com
www.harlequingames.com
Middle Earth - Legends- Serim Ral
CTF 2187 - Starquest - Crack of Doom
Battle of the Planets - Exile
****************************************************
340 North Road, Cardiff CF14 3BP
Tel 029 2062 5665 12-6.30 Weekdays
Fax 029 2062 5532 24 hours
----- Original Message -----
From: "Johan Grankvist" <redeyejoe@hem.passagen.se>
To: <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 3:02 AM
Subject: SV: [mepbmlist] me world champs
> Opinions please? Then we can go onto the various scoring systems and
ways
> to encouarge quicker games.
Im not in any game but when I read your mail and knew the problems with a
fast playing PBM, I thought of why you don't re-do the deadline system.
You set a deadline, 1-3 weeks ahead, depending on what you decided.
But if you get the turns in before the deadline, you run the game anyway.
i.e if you recive all the turns on Wednesday and the deadline is Saturday,
your run the game and send it out.
By this you save a few days, give the players the choice when to send in
the
turn and save a number of weeks until the game has ended.
Can become a bit stressed though, both for the players (to plan and
coordinate) and for the GM (to check the number of recived turns and
process
them when recived)...
Dunno if you whant that kinda game...
RedEyeJoe
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best friends, most artistic, class clown Find 'em here:
http://click.egroups.com/1/7078/11//430399//964404017/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm
Clint wrote ...
Won't work I am afraid - over 50% of our players get their turn on the
process date. Also I have found that it is irrlevant what deadline you do
set as a considerable proportion get theirs turn in as close to the deadline
as possible.
I'd agree with this. Certainly from my own experience as a GM it doesn't
seem to matter when you set a deadline, at least half the players will
always wait until the last moment to send in orders. I'll plead guilty
(for the most part) to being just such a player when it comes to Middle
Earth. In the days before email (and before I had a fax machine) I
always got my orders in with time to spare (having to reply on the
postal service). Nowadays thought it's always a temptation to leave
things until the last miniute. Partly this is laziness I suppose, but
these days opeople keep talking and making last minute changes to the
team plan until very late, sometimes right up to the morning of the
processing day!
Colin.
Hi,
First thoughts are in favour of Clint's suggestions (i.e. a Cup
competition etc), but I'd better reserve final judgement until I see
what my team has to say!
What I will say is that our decision to resign game 30 was based on the
expectation of the revised scoring system. With any form of Cup
competition it is probable that we would have fought on. We would thus
prefer it if a way can be found not to use this result as part of any
revise Cup-style competition. That said, perhaps the US team could be
given a bye to the next round (especially if there's an odd number of
teams)?
More thoughts when I hear from the rest of the team ...
Colin.
PS: I've sent this to the MEPBM list as well as to Clint and Ben, since
I'n not sure who the other team captains are!
