I play the Blind Sorcerer in game 71, and agree with Ian that this
problem within our team has generally be dealt with. In reading the
messages on the thread I want to clear up something like Ian. There
have been no attacks by nations of the DS side on each other. While
there is bad blood and distrust, those are diplomatic problems that
can be dealt with within the alliance and in my opinion does not
require the moderator to step in.
The fact that we had a leak to the opposition did give them some
advantage. My hat is off to J D Simpson for being an honorable guy and
revealing that they had been receiving our message traffic when I
asked him point blank. As far as them taking advantage of the
information they received it was only right. Ultra and Bletchley Park
in World War II is an illustration of how the game reflects things
that happen in real wars. J D figured we would catch on eventually and
begin using the leak to our advantage through disinformation, I still
commend him though for his honesty.
I would only advocate moderator intervention when it is proven that
one player is intentionally betraying another player on his own team
to the opposition by giving them confidential information on his
allies troop and character movement orders so that they can then
ambush said targets. This I believe is an attack on the integrity of
the game itself. If someone is guilty of such an infraction I think
there should be a stiff penalty. I don't want anyone to infer that I
am making that accusation however.
I intend to soldier on in the service of the Dark One in game 71, and
look forward to the demise of the opposition.
kingoftherill@yahoo.com wrote:
As far as them taking advantage of the
information they received it was only right. Ultra and Bletchley Park
in World War II is an illustration of how the game reflects things
that happen in real wars.
Absolutely right. If anyone were to send me information (accidentally or
otherwise) I'd use it, after careful evaluation of course. Remember, "walls
have ears"...
As for sanctioning players who deliberately send out info on their team
mates, I would have thought that the players themselves would provide a
suitable sanction without the need for GM intervention: such a player would
find it very difficult to play again, and if he did, then he would in all
probability be frozen out of the loop in his side's communications, would
not receive help and would quickly realise the error of his ways...
GM interference in a game is a tricky thing. And what if a GM has to
sanction himself...? 
Gavin
GM interference in a game is a tricky thing. And what if a GM has to
sanction himself...?
Gavin
Hi,
Rob is the GM of the game (77) in which I and my mostly Cardiff mates
(inlcuding 4 GMs) are playing against Andy Wright and the DS team of 51
I'm delighted that Rob is being super-tough on us and refusing just about
every whine, whinge and player rant that we subject him to. As a player its
annoying as hell, but we have to be seen to be whiter than white when we
play.
To be honest, most of the office refs seem to just love turning down
requests from other members of the office when they have player hats on.
Sam
(wearing half player hat, half 'almost a ref' hat)
> GM interference in a game is a tricky thing. And what if a GM has to
> sanction himself...?
>
> Gavin
Hi,
Rob is the GM of the game (77) in which I and my mostly Cardiff mates
(inlcuding 4 GMs) are playing against Andy Wright and the DS team of 51
I'm delighted that Rob is being super-tough on us and refusing just about
every whine, whinge and player rant that we subject him to. As a player
its
annoying as hell, but we have to be seen to be whiter than white when we
play.
To be honest, most of the office refs seem to just love turning down
requests from other members of the office when they have player hats on.
Sam
(wearing half player hat, half 'almost a ref' hat)
RD: Good stuff Sam, that's the kinda thing we like to hear!
Richard.
ยทยทยท
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Roads" <sam@samroads.co.uk>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Nations, attacking team mates
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Sam Roads wrote:
GM interference in a game is a tricky thing. And what if a GM has to
sanction himself...?
Gavin
To be honest, most of the office refs seem to just love turning down
requests from other members of the office when they have player hats on.
Don't worry, Sam, I wasn't having a go at you, just taking this discussion
to its extreme conclusion.
When you complain to Rob, do you have to wear paper hats so you both know
which of your personas is talking...? (I have this great image of the
office cat watching all this with a very bemused and slightly distant air on
its chops!)
I've been listening to "I'm sorry, I haven't a clue" tapes on the long drive
back from Frankfurt. You can tell, can't you... I particularly liked their
radio version of 'One Man and His Dog'.
Gavin
To be honest, most of the office refs seem to just love turning down
requests from other members of the office when they have player hats on.
Yes Sam they do don't they...
Clint
