Neutrals all one way

mepbmlist
#1

I think this runs along the lines of the Newbie thread....while Newbies may
have the luxury of time to mess around with the neutrals, this type of thing
wouldn't happen if veterans only were allowed to run Neuts. At least no
4 or all neuts on one side.

But of course, the game is more than a show of hands. People drop, people
screw up royally. Anything can happen. Conventional wisdom is merely a
generalization of the past. It is not prophecy. 4 neutrals joining one side
may actually barely balance out the disaster that allegiance had created for
itself. 14 uncommunicating, uncoordinated players are, frankly, no match for
a Team of 11. And if you've caught yourself in a game where you're up against
an actual Team of 14 or more, well, it's your money. Experiment and try new
things, or just try again...the point is all about fun!

Regards,

Brad Brunet for Enion119, Saruman24, and a host of dead Arfanhils...

ps - none of the above have ever been predetermined, but it doesn't take
long to determine which team deserves my efforts....get talking to your
friendly neighbourhood neutral today! Remember: it's about teamwork.
Nobody talks to neutral - neutral figures either a) there isn't a team there,
or b) they don't want me (sniff..). I've seen the worst excuses for
"diplomacy" degrade into whiny, spiteful name calling when I've joined the
other side....um, what did you expect? It ain't only the Newbies that
should recieve that new package titled - "It's a TEAM Game!" :wink:

···

On Fri, 06 July 2001, blchezluis@aol.com wrote:

I do not know about the rest of the players of Middle Earth, but I
have a problem when too many, mainly when all the neutrals go one way
or the other. I find that it does not make for a balanced nor
enjoyable game. Many times I also realize that it is somewhat
predetermined as to which way a nation will change its allengiance
to. In other words if let us say for instance the Rhudar go free,
the Dunns for sake of staying in the game must also go free or
otherwise face anhilation. The Southern block going the same way
also makes for an unfun game. These two going dark spell doom for
the free early on, these two going free mean the QA is out of the
game. Is it me or does something need to be possibly done about this
when and IF, I do mean IF a new edition comes out.. I do not have
any suggestions right now other than this small band aid of please
all you neutral players out there think of game balance occasionally
also, beyond your own predetermined views.

B

Middle Earth PBM List - Middle Earth and Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.egroups.com
http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com

#2

A current game that I am in is in a weird situation. The team I am on
eliminated two of the opposition and were clearly the better team.
Unfortunately that also extended to communicating with the neutrals and once
we had 3 onside we decided (as a team, by a narrow vote) that that was
enough for game balance and stopped talking to the other 2 neutrals.

We are currently dealing with the fallout of that decision with two neutrals
who are both very displeased at the fact that:

a) our communication suddenly stopped
b) they don't want to join the other (non-communicating) team
c) that we aren't sure we want the one that went ahead and declared for us
anyway

It isn't pleasant, and we only did it for the sake of game balance......

Tony

···

----- Original Message -----
From: BBrunet <ditletang@canada.com>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 07 July 2001 07:09
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Neutrals all one way

I think this runs along the lines of the Newbie thread....while Newbies

may

have the luxury of time to mess around with the neutrals, this type of

thing

wouldn't happen if veterans only were allowed to run Neuts. At least no
4 or all neuts on one side.

But of course, the game is more than a show of hands. People drop, people
screw up royally. Anything can happen. Conventional wisdom is merely a
generalization of the past. It is not prophecy. 4 neutrals joining one

side

may actually barely balance out the disaster that allegiance had created

for

itself. 14 uncommunicating, uncoordinated players are, frankly, no match

for

a Team of 11. And if you've caught yourself in a game where you're up

against

an actual Team of 14 or more, well, it's your money. Experiment and try

new

things, or just try again...the point is all about fun!

Regards,

Brad Brunet for Enion119, Saruman24, and a host of dead Arfanhils...

ps - none of the above have ever been predetermined, but it doesn't take
long to determine which team deserves my efforts....get talking to your
friendly neighbourhood neutral today! Remember: it's about teamwork.
Nobody talks to neutral - neutral figures either a) there isn't a team

there,

or b) they don't want me (sniff..). I've seen the worst excuses for
"diplomacy" degrade into whiny, spiteful name calling when I've joined the
other side....um, what did you expect? It ain't only the Newbies that
should recieve that new package titled - "It's a TEAM Game!" :wink:

On Fri, 06 July 2001, blchezluis@aol.com wrote:

>
> I do not know about the rest of the players of Middle Earth, but I
> have a problem when too many, mainly when all the neutrals go one way
> or the other. I find that it does not make for a balanced nor
> enjoyable game. Many times I also realize that it is somewhat
> predetermined as to which way a nation will change its allengiance
> to. In other words if let us say for instance the Rhudar go free,
> the Dunns for sake of staying in the game must also go free or
> otherwise face anhilation. The Southern block going the same way
> also makes for an unfun game. These two going dark spell doom for
> the free early on, these two going free mean the QA is out of the
> game. Is it me or does something need to be possibly done about this
> when and IF, I do mean IF a new edition comes out.. I do not have
> any suggestions right now other than this small band aid of please
> all you neutral players out there think of game balance occasionally
> also, beyond your own predetermined views.
>
> B
>
>
> Middle Earth PBM List - Middle Earth and Harlequin Games
> To Unsubscribe:www.egroups.com
> http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com

Middle Earth PBM List - Middle Earth and Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.egroups.com
http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#3

The decision to pick an allegiance belongs to the neutrals, not to the
aligned players. You should integrate the neutrals who decide to declare
for you, because once it's done there's noting that can change it. So
why play on with a sour atmosphere?

If, as it appears, there was a serious mismatch in the experience levels
of the original 2 teams, then you ought to save your ire for Harlequin*,
rather than the neutral players, who cannot be blamed for not wanting to
join a non-communicating allegiance. Such a group are thus a self-
declared lost cause.

To be characteristically magnanimous though :wink: I don't really see what
Clint can do about the situations. If he waits for every experienced
team to get an experienced opposition, the waiting lists grow, and the
VP players never get the educational *rse whipping that they need to
help them into the grown up league.

A player rating system would help, but I think apart from Brad, and
myself, there was no interest in that discussion. I wonder if some sort of
insurance policy would work...

Just as a discussion starter:
On turn 10 of a disappointing game. A vote is called among all players.
If more than half of the active players ask for the game to be written
off, Harlequin returns 50% of all money paid. OR 5 free turns in a new
game. OR this only applies to "insured games" where players have had
to stump up an extra premium at the start. And so on...

Such an idea, or something similar, would cover not just games where
your opposition fails to talk to any of the neutrals, but also games where
4 or 5 of your opposition get destroyed, bankrupt themselves, or drop
to go back to their skateboards.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

TONY A & JANETTE S <janton@cwcom.net> wrote

A current game that I am in is in a weird situation. The team I am on
eliminated two of the opposition and were clearly the better team.
Unfortunately that also extended to communicating with the neutrals and once
we had 3 onside we decided (as a team, by a narrow vote) that that was
enough for game balance and stopped talking to the other 2 neutrals.

We are currently dealing with the fallout of that decision with two neutrals
who are both very displeased at the fact that:

a) our communication suddenly stopped
b) they don't want to join the other (non-communicating) team
c) that we aren't sure we want the one that went ahead and declared for us
anyway

It isn't pleasant, and we only did it for the sake of game balance......

#4
#5

Returning money to customers who have received poor service or value
for money is excellent business practice, especially in a business where
customer loyalty is of importance. Bad companies don't return money,
mediocre companies return money only when there is proven culpability
on their part. Good companies return money even when ill fortune has
resulted in an unhappy customer - goods despatched but lost in the post
for example. Company loses a little money, but happy customer stays
with them, and in the longer term, that money, and much more comes
back.

But I even considered the fact that Harlequin might not see it that way,
and suggested the possibility of an insurance premium, so that the
scheme only applies to insured games. Provided not too many mis-
matched games were set up, losses from abandoned games would be
made up from the premiums of successful games.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Din <din_ohtar@yahoo.com.au> wrote

I would never vote for harly to
return money to us.

I want harly to remain in buisness,

#6

Can we then increase turn fees to cover the 90% of games that will decide
that the game is not a viable one? :slight_smile: At the moment as around 1 in 5 games
end before turn 10 (rough estimate) then an overall 20% increase in turn fee
would cover this? Would the 50% return fee be for both teams or only the
one? :slight_smile:

As a serious point I keep an eye out for games that end early and if teams
constantly do it then I will put a deposit for them in future - helps stop
the "well we might lose so let's start again" just as the other team has got
started. I also try to get the games even at the start - but as was pointed
out it is virtually impossible to have an even game - one side will always
be better at X than the other. :slight_smile:

Clint

···

Just as a discussion starter:
On turn 10 of a disappointing game. A vote is called among all players.
If more than half of the active players ask for the game to be written
off, Harlequin returns 50% of all money paid. OR 5 free turns in a new
game. OR this only applies to "insured games" where players have had
to stump up an extra premium at the start. And so on...

#7

Okay Lyndsay's back for the hols - and will be working for us over the next
two months so I'll see if we can get a photo of her - presently still
single... :slight_smile:

I want harly to remain in buisness, employ more and
more people (maybe even put up a photo of Lyndsay),
keep up the same high standards, and maybe start
de-sexing their cats (three now - twitch, podge, and
sally ? It was only twitch when I started with them).
You sure they are cats and not rabbits ?.

Heh Twitch and Sally have been done.

Clint

#8

Can we then increase turn fees to cover the 90% of games that will decide
that the game is not a viable one? :slight_smile:

I think that would be unlikely. It's really annoying when you get to
around turn 10, and realize that you've paid 39 quid in turn fees for
something that turns out to be a damp squib. A return of half that in an
abandoned game would still necessitate the players waving goodbye to
half their money, so you wouldn't get a majority of players to take that
decision lightly. By turn 10, players have also put in a much more
serious investment - time, planning, debate and aspirations, and the
desire to make a game of it is usually stronger at that stage than even at
game start.

At the moment as around 1 in 5 games
end before turn 10 (rough estimate) then an overall 20% increase in turn fee
would cover this?

No, but a 20% premium for an insured game would be reasonable. So,
say 5 free turns on a new game, if a majority of players vote to abandon
a game on turn 10. That's worth 19.50 UKP, 20% of which is 3.90.
So you'd charge all players an extra 3.90 at startup for insured game
status. I expect you'd find that only serious players would be willing to
pay it, and that in itself would make it unlikely that you'd have to pay
out.

Would the 50% return fee be for both teams or only the
one? :slight_smile:

It would be for all active players on turn 10. The outvoted should be
compensated for having a game stopped against their will. It's possible
to find yourself, as a serious responsible player, in a useless team. If it's
become apparent to the neutrals and the opposition that your team is
useless, you'd probably want to vote with them for a game
abandonment.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Middle Earth PBM Games <me@MiddleEarthGames.com> wrote

#9

>
>I want harly to remain in buisness,
Returning money to customers who have received poor
service or value
for money is excellent business practice, especially
in a business where
customer loyalty is of importance.

And who else runs middle earth ? Actually I hope Clint
isn't reading this. Who knows what he will do when he
finds out that he is the only bloke who can supply me
with my weekly fix of middle earth.

:slight_smile:

If harly makes an error, then I expect harly to fix it
up.

But when the problems was caused by players being
stupid, or lacking the skill needed to make an
effective team, then I don't see why harly should paid
for it.

It wasn't harly who provided the poor service. Sure it
wasn't an excellent game, but I would point the finger
at the players.

You remind me of my brother who says 'don't sue
people, sue companies. They have more money'.

Bad companies don't return money,
mediocre companies return money only when there is
proven culpability
on their part. Good companies return money even
when ill fortune has
resulted in an unhappy customer - goods despatched
but lost in the post
for example. Company loses a little money, but
happy customer stays
with them, and in the longer term, that money, and
much more comes
back.

I'll accept that. But I still think that harly should
keep its money when the other side cops a whipping.

But I even considered the fact that Harlequin might
not see it that way,
and suggested the possibility of an insurance
premium, so that the
scheme only applies to insured games. Provided not
too many mis-
matched games were set up, losses from abandoned
games would be
made up from the premiums of successful games.

I still think there are better ways to lessen the
number of mis-matched game than making the pbm company
paid up.

But to each his own
din

···

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

_____________________________________________________________________________
http://messenger.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Messenger
- Voice chat, mail alerts, stock quotes and favourite news and lots more!

#10

greeting evil free.

thanks for the 9 war machines at 3010.

But what happened to my allies ???

thanks
dim sim of the doggies

···

_____________________________________________________________________________
http://messenger.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Messenger
- Voice chat, mail alerts, stock quotes and favourite news and lots more!