[ME33a] Game Won!

mepbmlist
#1

At 02:23 PM 09/12/2004, watakshi@comcast.net wrote (Quoting Clint):

Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of our team almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this game. 3 MTs for the Dragon Lord (2 very hard to get to, one of which virtually impossible). WK has a town in Mordor ready to made into a MT and a very strong position. Ditto the rest.

I'd upgrade the WW somewhat as well as he virtually gains nothing (not sure what format you are thinking of here). FPs economy is fine, DS is relatively awesome especially with the 15k gold extra per nation they get.

I'd personally power down the DS in the game to give the FP a decent chance. I'd keep the BS's changes as they worked well and enabled a defence (and aggression with the KE) in the East though. No offence intended to our opposition (they had some team issues) but I'd say that all things being equal the DS should win 90% of the games.

LT: Sounds like his team were a bit bitter from taking a drubbing. I think it's true that the DS are stronger than basic 2950. Perhaps a little too strong, but not to the extent that he suggests.

DS should possibly be reduced just slightly. Yes WW could be made more interesting. In a 12 v 12 the choice of neutrals makes all the difference to the balance anyway.

Clint posting this to the forum is a big thing actually, as many players who have not tried WotR will just accept his opinion as gospel. I think he has effectively stuffed WotR here. Sorry Richard, but I think that in terms of scenario promotion he has "dealt you a mortal blow" here.

    Laurence G.Tilley

RD: Well firstly, -I- am rather bitter because some of the DS 'extras' eg the extra troops and extra gold, were not my idea but were added in at somebody else's suggestion. I think but I can't swear it was Clint himself, and if so he can hardly criticize me for making the DS too strong!

I still have the feedback from Marc Pinnsoneault and others where -he- reckons the -Gondors- are far too strong. This directly contradicts Clint's current opinion, above.

It appears that I must repeat: the power balance between good and evil in WotR is near as dammit the same as in 1650. All I did was take the 2950 scenario and increase the size and number of pops to 1650 levels. Therefore, whatever Clint or Marc's perception, the overall balance is almost identical to 1650 - except of course of the extra DS gold and troops (not my idea!) which were bolted on as an afterthought.

WotR may not be perfect, but it deserves more than one play before people start writing it off. Did anybody write off 1650 or 2950 after one play? C'mon guys, give WotR a fair crack of the whip!

Richard.

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/ME33a/
  
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ME33a-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk
  
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

----- Original Message -----
From: Laurence G. Tilley
To: ME33a@yahoogroups.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ME33a] Game Won!

#2

I'm in my 3rd WotR. First as FP, against a team RD
(and if I recall correctly LT) was on and we won quite
easily.

Second game was DS, and really a non-contest, over in
10 turns or so.

The third is turn 18 and rolling strongly.

The #1 key to WotR is to relaize it is neither 1650
nor 2950.

1650: huge starting armies with a huge FP recruiting
and economic advantage and huge DS character
advantage. FP try to win quickly while the DS try to
extend their character lead and wear down the DS.

2950: Tiny economies and balanced characters. It is
hard to crush Mordor with military might, so this
becomes more of a character war type game.

WotR: Balanced characters and nearly balanced
economics. The DS can use their starting gold to keep
the market up. SMALL starting armies for the most
part, but evenly so. WotR is purely a tempo game.
Get operational tempo, keep operational tempo. Out
recruit the enemy, out kill the enemey, force him to
react to you.

The DS have to bust out of Mordor and put preasure on
Rhun and Mirkwood. Make the FP try to defend the big
open area.

The FP need to clear Mirkwood and bottle up the DS
inside Mordir.

If you play this like 1650, where DS try to build a
huge character lead, they are doomed. If the FP play
this like 2050, working on characters to match the
expected DS onslaught, they are dead.

WotR is a military game with victory going to which
ever side puts the biggest armies in the field the
fastest, and uses them to most effect.

···

--- richard devereux <rd@pagan-47.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: Laurence G. Tilley
To: ME33a@yahoogroups.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ME33a] Game Won!

At 02:23 PM 09/12/2004, watakshi@comcast.net wrote
(Quoting Clint):

Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it
and some of our team almost revolted when we
realised how strong the DS are in this game. 3 MTs
for the Dragon Lord (2 very hard to get to, one of
which virtually impossible). WK has a town in Mordor
ready to made into a MT and a very strong position.
Ditto the rest.

I'd upgrade the WW somewhat as well as he virtually
gains nothing (not sure what format you are thinking
of here). FPs economy is fine, DS is relatively
awesome especially with the 15k gold extra per
nation they get.

I'd personally power down the DS in the game to give
the FP a decent chance. I'd keep the BS's changes as
they worked well and enabled a defence (and
aggression with the KE) in the East though. No
offence intended to our opposition (they had some
team issues) but I'd say that all things being equal
the DS should win 90% of the games.

LT: Sounds like his team were a bit bitter from
taking a drubbing. I think it's true that the DS
are stronger than basic 2950. Perhaps a little too
strong, but not to the extent that he suggests.

DS should possibly be reduced just slightly. Yes WW
could be made more interesting. In a 12 v 12 the
choice of neutrals makes all the difference to the
balance anyway.

Clint posting this to the forum is a big thing
actually, as many players who have not tried WotR
will just accept his opinion as gospel. I think he
has effectively stuffed WotR here. Sorry Richard,
but I think that in terms of scenario promotion he
has "dealt you a mortal blow" here.

    Laurence G.Tilley

RD: Well firstly, -I- am rather bitter because some
of the DS 'extras' eg the extra troops and extra
gold, were not my idea but were added in at somebody
else's suggestion. I think but I can't swear it was
Clint himself, and if so he can hardly criticize me
for making the DS too strong!

I still have the feedback from Marc Pinnsoneault and
others where -he- reckons the -Gondors- are far too
strong. This directly contradicts Clint's current
opinion, above.

It appears that I must repeat: the power balance
between good and evil in WotR is near as dammit the
same as in 1650. All I did was take the 2950
scenario and increase the size and number of pops to
1650 levels. Therefore, whatever Clint or Marc's
perception, the overall balance is almost identical
to 1650 - except of course of the extra DS gold and
troops (not my idea!) which were bolted on as an
afterthought.

WotR may not be perfect, but it deserves more than
one play before people start writing it off. Did
anybody write off 1650 or 2950 after one play?
C'mon guys, give WotR a fair crack of the whip!

Richard.

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/ME33a/
  
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ME33a-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk
  
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com

#3

Hi Folks,

I was playing Noldo & Duns in this WOTR GM game that we recently won. When I first heard about the WOTR variant I was very excited by it, to my mind 2950 falls short of being a LOTR simulation in some areas and WOTR seemed to be trying to address these areas however the balance seemed to be shifted way to much in favour of the DS.

The #1 key to WotR is to relaize it is neither 1650
nor 2950.

But it is trying to be a balanced 2950 variant presumably?

..snip..

WotR: Balanced characters and nearly balanced
economics.

I have to dispute this, the CL ability can never be balanced and the increase in starting DS armies and reduction in FP armies (relatively speaking) are not balanced.at all!. Mordor is also a great fortress to defend that the FP simply do not have.

If you play this like 1650, where DS try to build a
huge character lead, they are doomed. If the FP play
this like 2050, working on characters to match the
expected DS onslaught, they are dead.

In WOTR to my mind the DS still have the character advantage (CL cannot be argued with) and also gain more economical and military advantage compared to the FP gains. I would love to see a more balanced version of this scenario.

WotR is a military game with victory going to which
ever side puts the biggest armies in the field the
fastest, and uses them to most effect.

It seems very clear to me that with both teams being roughly equal the FP cannot hope to win WOTR if the DS concentrate on military from the word go, they have the character advantage and also the initial military advantage.

regards

Mark (Palantir/XML author)

#4

Richard:
It seems one of the hardest things for an administrator to do is leave a creative person alone and let him create. A constant jusgement substitution ensues which diminishes the quality of the final product. Your WOTR seems to be an example of this process. Not to mention the chop job on 1650, where a accretions, house rules and services has eroded the artistic vision of the creators.

While I wish Harley well with their new modules, if they don't show a broader horizon and more sensitive insights they will be left with nothing better than the wreckage they have left behind.
Ed

···

From: "richard devereux" <rd@pagan-47.fsnet.co.uk>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <ME33a@yahoogroups.co.uk>
CC: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: [ME33a] Game Won!
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:14:51 -0000

----- Original Message -----
From: Laurence G. Tilley
To: ME33a@yahoogroups.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ME33a] Game Won!

At 02:23 PM 09/12/2004, watakshi@comcast.net wrote (Quoting Clint):

Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of our team almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this game. 3 MTs for the Dragon Lord (2 very hard to get to, one of which virtually impossible). WK has a town in Mordor ready to made into a MT and a very strong position. Ditto the rest.

I'd upgrade the WW somewhat as well as he virtually gains nothing (not sure what format you are thinking of here). FPs economy is fine, DS is relatively awesome especially with the 15k gold extra per nation they get.

I'd personally power down the DS in the game to give the FP a decent chance. I'd keep the BS's changes as they worked well and enabled a defence (and aggression with the KE) in the East though. No offence intended to our opposition (they had some team issues) but I'd say that all things being equal the DS should win 90% of the games.

LT: Sounds like his team were a bit bitter from taking a drubbing. I think it's true that the DS are stronger than basic 2950. Perhaps a little too strong, but not to the extent that he suggests.

DS should possibly be reduced just slightly. Yes WW could be made more interesting. In a 12 v 12 the choice of neutrals makes all the difference to the balance anyway.

Clint posting this to the forum is a big thing actually, as many players who have not tried WotR will just accept his opinion as gospel. I think he has effectively stuffed WotR here. Sorry Richard, but I think that in terms of scenario promotion he has "dealt you a mortal blow" here.

    Laurence G.Tilley

RD: Well firstly, -I- am rather bitter because some of the DS 'extras' eg the extra troops and extra gold, were not my idea but were added in at somebody else's suggestion. I think but I can't swear it was Clint himself, and if so he can hardly criticize me for making the DS too strong!

I still have the feedback from Marc Pinnsoneault and others where -he- reckons the -Gondors- are far too strong. This directly contradicts Clint's current opinion, above.

It appears that I must repeat: the power balance between good and evil in WotR is near as dammit the same as in 1650. All I did was take the 2950 scenario and increase the size and number of pops to 1650 levels. Therefore, whatever Clint or Marc's perception, the overall balance is almost identical to 1650 - except of course of the extra DS gold and troops (not my idea!) which were bolted on as an afterthought.

WotR may not be perfect, but it deserves more than one play before people start writing it off. Did anybody write off 1650 or 2950 after one play? C'mon guys, give WotR a fair crack of the whip!

Richard.

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/ME33a/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ME33a-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.uk

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#5

Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of our team
almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this game.

Note our team almost refused to play when they saw the strength in
actuality of the DS. That's why I fed back on this. I don't normally
comment on games as the line between GM and Player could get fuzzy so I try
not to but this I felt important enough to comment on. Different players
like different things - for example the All neutral format looks to be well
supported and desired by many but as a player I'd rather not play it. As a
GM we're very happy to support everybody's format of games.

3 MTs for the Dragon Lord (2 very hard to get to, one of which virtually
impossible). WK has a town in Mordor ready to made into a MT and a very
strong position. Ditto the rest.

This made it very much an Emissary game for the long format in any normal
format. The DS get no disadvantages and only advantages in relation to the
FP IMO. I quite enjoy the Emi game (I can't comment where as I'm still
active in some games where I am heavily employing this tactic) btw.

I'd upgrade the WW somewhat as well as he virtually gains nothing (not
sure what format you are thinking of here). FPs economy is fine, DS is
relatively awesome especially with the 15k gold extra per nation they get.

I'd personally power down the DS in the game to give the FP a decent
chance. I'd keep the BS's changes as they worked well and enabled a
defence (and aggression with the KE) in the East though. No offence
intended to our opposition (they had some team issues) but I'd say that
all things being equal the DS should win 90% of the games.

LT: Sounds like his team were a bit bitter from taking a drubbing. I
think it's true that the DS are stronger than basic 2950. Perhaps a
little too strong, but not to the extent that he suggests.

DS should possibly be reduced just slightly. Yes WW could be made more
interesting. In a 12 v 12 the choice of neutrals makes all the difference
to the balance anyway.

Clint posting this to the forum is a big thing actually, as many players
who have not tried WotR will just accept his opinion as gospel. I think
he has effectively stuffed WotR here. Sorry Richard, but I think that in
terms of scenario promotion he has "dealt you a mortal blow" here.

It could be changed. Like I said I think that the DS are very strong and
it makes it an unfair fight. Changes could well make it more
viable. Note I hope I put Clint (player) on this as there's a big
difference. I try to differentiate between what I like personally and what
the GM is happy to go with. I'm not expecting everyone to go with what I
like at all - and happy to support games of any format (within reason!)
that you guys want to play. Just my personal opinion of the format that's all.

RD: Well firstly, -I- am rather bitter because some of the DS 'extras' eg
the extra troops and extra gold, were not my idea but were added in at
somebody else's suggestion. I think but I can't swear it was Clint
himself, and if so he can hardly criticize me for making the DS too strong!

Weren't me (or a member of the staff)... :slight_smile:

I still have the feedback from Marc Pinnsoneault and others where -he-
reckons the -Gondors- are far too strong. This directly contradicts
Clint's current opinion, above.

Gondors are strong I agree - but only similarly so to the 1650 version. DS
are proportionally stronger than the DS in 1650 I think (and the 1650 IMO
is pretty balanced - slightly in favour of the FP I'd say). Clint (PLAYER).

WotR may not be perfect, but it deserves more than one play before people
start writing it off. Did anybody write off 1650 or 2950 after one
play? C'mon guys, give WotR a fair crack of the whip!

I think we did. I've looked at the format a lot before hand but not from a
player perspective. This is exactly why I think GMs playing is a very good
thing as it gives us a different perspective, which I think, can only be
good for the game. Sometimes the only way to actually find out something
is to play the game... :slight_smile:

In short I think the balance favours the DS and with some minor tweaks that
could be sorted. Suggestions would include. I've given some suggestions
as to what I think would help this format. It's a cool idea, but one that
IMO as a player, I don't think is quite right.

Feedback on Wotr Format: (constructive I hope)
I'd remove some of the DS additional pcs and the fortifications (DkL
capital is awesome for example) - basically Fortress Mordor is even more of
a Fortress than any other format of the game.
Improve the WW and RE.
Remove the additional gold for the DS.
I'd leave the troops maybe - I've not given that aspect much thought.

That would make it a very viable alternative IMO.

Clint (player)

···

----------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.809 / Virus Database: 551 - Release Date: 09/12/04

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#6

If the balance favours the DS, it is not to the extent that you imply. It
is also important to understand one of the key design ideas: To more
accurately (than GSI's 2950 design) represent the War of the Ring as
described in the books. The DS are, at that point in history, in the
ascendency. The FP are not as well prepared as they should
be. Specifically, there is an imminent expectation of orcish hordes
surging OUT of Mordor, not cowering behind the mountain walls waiting 20
turns for the ClL to build up an army of agents. The DkL capital is
awesome? YES, read description in the book.

None of that means that WotR is off balanced enough to make it a bad game,
as a number of playtests have now shown. It is certainly a dramatic
improvement on raw 2950, and a good contender to challenge the classic 1650.

b24fc4.jpg
     Laurence G.Tilley

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

At 08:53 PM 11/12/2004, Clint wrote:

In short I think the balance favours the DS and with some minor tweaks that
could be sorted. Suggestions would include. I've given some suggestions
as to what I think would help this format. It's a cool idea, but one that
IMO as a player, I don't think is quite right.

Feedback on Wotr Format: (constructive I hope)
I'd remove some of the DS additional pcs and the fortifications (DkL
capital is awesome for example) - basically Fortress Mordor is even more of
a Fortress than any other format of the game.
Improve the WW and RE.
Remove the additional gold for the DS.
I'd leave the troops maybe - I've not given that aspect much thought.

#7

I've been trying to get players for the second game of this format but so
far have only got 7 players. Is there any interest out there?

Failing that what about a 2 nation game? GB nations for your both nations
but otherwise using the same rules as this format?

Would there be any interest in this format?

Clint (GM)

···

----------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.809 / Virus Database: 551 - Release Date: 09/12/04

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#8

GB would be also fine for me.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: ME Games Ltd
  To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 10:29 PM
  Subject: [mepbmlist] All neutral game

  I've been trying to get players for the second game of this format but so
  far have only got 7 players. Is there any interest out there?

  Failing that what about a 2 nation game? GB nations for your both nations
  but otherwise using the same rules as this format?

  Would there be any interest in this format?

  Clint (GM)

    ----------

  ---
  Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
  Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
  Version: 6.0.809 / Virus Database: 551 - Release Date: 09/12/04

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

  Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
  To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
  Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mepbmlist/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    mepbmlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#9

>Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of

our team

>almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this

game.

Note our team almost refused to play when they saw the strength in
actuality of the DS. That's why I fed back on this.

Clint, sice WotR is so heavily slanted to the DS, perhaps your GM
team would be willing to face a quick destruction by our experienced
WotR team.....

You DS, we FP.... We stomp you bad.

WotR is the greatest MEGames scenario EVER! Great balance of
character and military. Great balance of DS/FP advantages. Great
balance of character types.

···

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, ME Games Ltd <me@M...> wrote:

#10

I've been away from MEPBM for awhile. I'm not familiar with the WotR
format. Can anyone give an old, feeble mind a clue about this new-
fangled way of playing MEPBM? Thanks.
Baruk

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, "Darrell" <threeedgedsword35@y...>
wrote:

>
> >Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of
our team
> >almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this
game.
>
> Note our team almost refused to play when they saw the strength

in

> actuality of the DS. That's why I fed back on this.

Clint, sice WotR is so heavily slanted to the DS, perhaps your GM
team would be willing to face a quick destruction by our

experienced

···

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, ME Games Ltd <me@M...> wrote:
WotR team.....

You DS, we FP.... We stomp you bad.

WotR is the greatest MEGames scenario EVER! Great balance of
character and military. Great balance of DS/FP advantages. Great
balance of character types.

#11

>
> >Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of
our team
> >almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this
game.
>
> Note our team almost refused to play when they saw the strength in
> actuality of the DS. That's why I fed back on this.

Clint, sice WotR is so heavily slanted to the DS, perhaps your GM
team would be willing to face a quick destruction by our experienced
WotR team.....

You DS, we FP.... We stomp you bad.

Note that this is a serious challenge -- our group is just finishing
a WOTR game where we've defeated the FP over 25 turns or so, and
we would like to turn the tables. We think the scenario is balanced
fairly well and victories have been due more to team skill than
scenario unbalance.

WotR is the greatest MEGames scenario EVER! Great balance of
character and military. Great balance of DS/FP advantages. Great
balance of character types.

What he said.

Tony Z

···

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:55:52PM -0000, Darrell wrote:

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, ME Games Ltd <me@M...> wrote:

--
Reputation is a side effect of conduct; the notion that it can be
created as a direct effect of promotion is one of those unfortunate
ills of thought plaguing the 20th century.
-- Graydon Saunders

#12

Clint, sice WotR is so heavily slanted to the DS, perhaps your GM
team would be willing to face a quick destruction by our experienced
WotR team.....

You DS, we FP.... We stomp you bad.

Sounds interesting. Unfortunately I'm in 3 grudge games at present so taking another on doesn't seem appropriate at present (half our team are in 2 grudge games ). Thanks for the offer.

WotR is the greatest MEGames scenario EVER! Great balance of
character and military. Great balance of DS/FP advantages. Great
balance of character types.

I've given my (and our team's) opinion on this. :slight_smile:

Clint (player)

···

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.0 - Release Date: 21/03/05

#13

>
> >Feedback on WOTR format - our GM team just played it and some of
our team
> >almost revolted when we realised how strong the DS are in this
game.
>
> Note our team almost refused to play when they saw the strength in
> actuality of the DS. That's why I fed back on this.

Clint, sice WotR is so heavily slanted to the DS, perhaps your GM
team would be willing to face a quick destruction by our experienced
WotR team.....

You DS, we FP.... We stomp you bad.

WotR is the greatest MEGames scenario EVER! Great balance of
character and military. Great balance of DS/FP advantages. Great
balance of character types.

RD: Thanks Darrell, the cheque is in the post :slight_smile:

Richard.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Darrell" <threeedgedsword35@yahoo.com>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 8:55 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] Open challenge to Clint and the GM Team

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, ME Games Ltd <me@M...> wrote:

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links