I think that it would be nice to fill in some holes that veterans know
but new players do not.
e.g. the camp limit is a crucial game feature that doesn't show up in
the rules. Say that it exists and give a *rough* guideline, e.g. 200
new pops in 2950, xxx new ones in 1650, xxx new ones in 4th age.
The challenge odds and weather tables have already been worked out in
Mouth of Sauron articles; ditto for the production and scoring
algorithms, which I have posted in the past on the GSI/DGE message
board. Give some links to this data for those folks who are inclined
in that direction.
I also think that some rough examples of (important) skill orders and
odds of success would really help people get up to speed. Again, vets
have a decent idea that you need a 60+ agent for assassins, 40+ for
gold thefts, etc. We also have the traditional rules of thumb for new
camps, pop center upgrades, threats, and so on. Not providing this
information - when so many folks basically know it anyways - isn't
keeping mystery in the game, it is simply giving an unnecessary edge
to the folks who know the answers.
e.g. with no stealth and equal relations, in the field, the odds of a
(40,60,80) agent to assassinate a 30-rank army commander are the
following; repeat for a 60 rank army commander. Give an example
involving agent vs. agent as well. I would also list the factors that
matter without going into detail as to how much: it is harder to
assassinate in enemy pop centers, harder to assassinate army
commanders or characters with agent rank, relations matter, and so on.
Some suggestions about what stealth does, and the difference between
natural skill rank and artifact-boosted skill rank, could also fall
into this category. You don't need tables of exact numbers, but
rather you want to give folks who are just starting out some
ballpark idea of how likely it is that they will succeed when they try
things.
cheers,
Marc
--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Charilaos Nikokavouras" <cn399@i...> wrote:
Getting off-lurker mode for a sec to offer my two euros' worth.
I think that as long as you have a random element in the game,
knowing the
mechanics in detail is not going to detract significantly from the
uncertainty factor, but will go a long way to making the game less
frustrating in some cases.
Knowing that a 40C has an 80% chance of upgrading relations is not
going to
give away the end-result of actually issuing the order. It will
still be a
random roll with a fair chance of failing. What you do away with, is
the
double uncertainty of both guessing your chances and actually
succeding in
your roll. I see no need for this.
We have the combat calculators and battles are still exciting with
the
outcome uncertain in many cases until the turn report arrives. So
you know
that 100 Hi will always beat 100 LI. But you don't know the enemy's
exact
numbers/armour/morale, PC loyalty, artifacts/spells with the army,
tactics
used etc. If you study the enemy's moves carefully and cast all
necessary
lore spells, then you deserve to have a better guesstimate of the
battle's
result.
Challenges. We know the exact chance of winning a challenge, does
this
detract from the 'uncertainty' of the game? Not at all, the odds are
just
that, odds. They don't give away the result, just help you put a
little bit
more education on your educated guess. Hell, even Thorin can lose a
challenge from Huz (and hello to the Rhun Easterlings from game 25
All in all, if I had a choice I'd much prefer to know what are the
chances
of me succeeding in my orders. Luck is good and makes for an
exciting game,
but we all draw the line somewhere. Personally, I prefer luck to
stay on the
roll of the (virtual) dice and stay out of my strategic planning
(which is
ยทยทยท
bad enough as it is 
Thanks
Haris
