small truth was for little minds, the large truth for great minds 
Kevin
···
Besides, I generally piss-off about 75% of my allies on any given
turn so you all had to put up with me, no small feat.
I know nothing else about that particular game, but isn't a player
(especially a neutral!) *allowed* to do that...? If neither side could
persuade him to do otherwise, maybe the blame isn't on him...
Very few players seem to know how to deal with neutrals and how to work
around them if they won't budge for a few turns. That's a pity.
Personally, I think neutrals should be allowed to change allegiance at will,
but that's another can of worms entirely!
Gavin
Darrell Shimel wrote:
···
There was the 3-1 neutral split with White Wizard
sitting the fence doing nothing but looking for the
One Ring ALL game.
Yes, he's "allowed" to do it, nobody's suggesting otherwise. The player announced at the beginning what he was doing and asked for cooperation. Most gave it. Nothing else you've written is relevant to game 233 or to Darrel's post.
Neutral's "can" change allegiance at will. It's the 175 order itself that's redundant and unnecessary. I will only use it in order to affect relations to Hated where I really really want to or Friendly for transfers, etc, otherwise, it's a waste of a perfectly good capital command order. The only "use" for it (besides relations) is to 1) place in a/the/some PRS supposedly, or 2) satisfy old fashioned allegiance players before they allow you "on their team". I don't give a whit for 1 and have little patience for 2.
Mind you, if we suddenly see a trend of neutrals attacking first 1 allegiance and then another, I guess more would start insisting on 2 above. Pity that. I've always wanted to play the Corsairs and conquer everything north of me. Harad first (strategic reasons) then QA, then simply continue on to Gondor..the "rest of the world" be damned... Imagine what they'd call me on the boards!
Brad
I know nothing else about that particular game, but isn't a player
(especially a neutral!) *allowed* to do that...? If neither side could
persuade him to do otherwise, maybe the blame isn't on him...
Very few players seem to know how to deal with neutrals and how to work
around them if they won't budge for a few turns. That's a pity.
Personally, I think neutrals should be allowed to change allegiance at will,
but that's another can of worms entirely!
Gavin
Darrell Shimel wrote:
There was the 3-1 neutral split with White Wizard
sitting the fence doing nothing but looking for the
One Ring ALL game.
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
···
Gavinwj <gavinwj@compuserve.com> wrote:
Darrell listed the WW's actions (or, inaction) as one of the reasons for the
game not being up to par. So my post was relevant to the situation.
The last paragraph was more of a sidebar, though, arising from the rest of
it. (If that makes you feel better.)
Interesting point point about order 175 and its relevance and use, though.
I've often wondered why neutrals can't have friendly relations with nations
on *both* sides until they formally declare: there's enough historical
precedent!
Gavin
Brad Brunet wrote:
···
Yes, he's "allowed" to do it, nobody's suggesting otherwise. The player
announced at the beginning what he was doing and asked for cooperation. Most
gave it. Nothing else you've written is relevant to game 233 or to Darrel's
post.Neutral's "can" change allegiance at will. It's the 175 order itself that's
redundant and unnecessary. I will only use it in order to affect relations to
Hated where I really really want to or Friendly for transfers, etc, otherwise,
it's a waste of a perfectly good capital command order. The only "use" for it
(besides relations) is to 1) place in a/the/some PRS supposedly, or 2) satisfy
old fashioned allegiance players before they allow you "on their team". I
don't give a whit for 1 and have little patience for 2.Mind you, if we suddenly see a trend of neutrals attacking first 1 allegiance
and then another, I guess more would start insisting on 2 above. Pity that.
I've always wanted to play the Corsairs and conquer everything north of me.
Harad first (strategic reasons) then QA, then simply continue on to
Gondor..the "rest of the world" be damned... Imagine what they'd call me on
the boards!Brad
Gavinwj <gavinwj@compuserve.com> wrote:
I know nothing else about that particular game, but isn't a player
(especially a neutral!) *allowed* to do that...? If neither side could
persuade him to do otherwise, maybe the blame isn't on him...Very few players seem to know how to deal with neutrals and how to work
around them if they won't budge for a few turns. That's a pity.Personally, I think neutrals should be allowed to change allegiance at will,
but that's another can of worms entirely!Gavin
Darrell Shimel wrote:
There was the 3-1 neutral split with White Wizard
sitting the fence doing nothing but looking for the
One Ring ALL game.Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.comYahoo! Groups Links
[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.comYahoo! Groups Links
I've often wondered why neutrals can't have friendly relations with nations
on *both* sides until they formally declare: there's enough historical
precedent!
Yes. I'd have lots of fun as Rhudaur doing this, I think.... 
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
···
Gavinwj <gavinwj@compuserve.com> wrote:
Actually, it was the 3-1.... or 2-1 maybe (but we did
have to deal with Rhun even before he went bankrupt
and that delayed Northmen action elsewhere).... that
was one of the many problems facing the FP in 233.
Most games are 3-2 or 4-1.... I thought 3-1 might be
confusing to some.... Hey, aren't there 5 neutrals is
a game, not 4? So I mentioned what the 5th neutral
was doing..... Nothing but looking for the One Ring
ALL game.
···
--- Gavinwj <gavinwj@compuserve.com> wrote:
Darrell listed the WW's actions (or, inaction) as
one of the reasons for the
game not being up to par. So my post was relevant to
the situation.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
Darrell,
I'm not necessarily referring to 233 or just 233. I've seen this situation multiple times in my playing years.
Russ
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Darrell Shimel
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: New 2950
Russ,
As you know, I was in 233. There were lots of
problems for the FP in that game.... SG being played
by an out of contact prisoner was just 1.
There was the Dwarven player that ran away from
contact with the enemy.
There was the 3-1 neutral split with White Wizard
sitting the fence doing nothing but looking for the
One Ring ALL game.
There was a real JERK playing Dunland (yes, it was
me), that used the early game to make a point about
PRS instead of making it a fun game.
AND...... The biggest problem for the FP was a
generally slow start.... From what I saw, no real
strong sense of urgency to gain and hold advantage
from GT1. From GT7 on it was all about losing slowly.
That said, having SG, a VERY important position,
played by a prisoner, was a MAJOR problem for the
team. Then again, I can't think of a SINGLE FP
position in 2950 that doesn't need to closly
coordinate with the others..... Maybe Rangers.
Darrell (First of the FP to bail on that loser of a
game).
--- RKF <rkfloyd@charter.net> wrote:
> There's always these great examples of how OK it is
> to play with prisoners. The examples always come
> from someone who hasn't just lost a game with
> prisoners on their side. Everytime my side wins a
> game in which a prisoner or two was on the other
> side, I have to listen to the other side cheapen our
> victory by saying something like "Well, if we hadn't
> had prisoners it would have turned out very
> different . . ." So if we're ok with prisoners lets
> stop using them for crutches! I guess it's easy to
> blame them as they can't reply to the emails.
>
> Russ
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Briggs
> To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 7:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: New 2950
>
>
> I've played for years with prisoners in both
> Hyborian
> War and MEPBM. No biggie. Some logisitcal
> issues,
> but they dont get any personal info, what's the
> difference.
>
> JB
>
> --- Colin Forbes <colin@timewyrm.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> > This seems to have been rumbling on for years.
> What
> > the hell is the
> > problem with playing with prisoners? If you are
> > really that worried by
> > it, you don't have to give out your full
> details.
> >
> > As a former PBM GM, and also with my Assistant
> > Editor of Flagship hat
> > on, I have talked to a couple of experts in this
> > field -- including
> > officials in two American prisons which allow
> their
> > inmates to play
> > PBM games. Anyone that is considered
> psycologically
> > unsuitable is not
> > permitted to take part in what is, after all, a
> > priviledge. You will
> > not meet raving sociopaths and serial killers in
> > these games, at
> > least, not from amongst the prisoner population.
> >
> > Does anyone want ME Games to simply say "no" to
> > prisoners playing MEPBM?
> >
> > Colin Forbes.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> =====
> john_h_briggs@yahoo.com
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn
> more.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
>
>
> 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]
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
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]
Yeah, Halo 2 is so 2004! Old news!
What you said was basically what my ambiguous point was about. If a team would have won anyways, let's stop moaning about who had a prisoner and who didn't. It looks like prisoners are a fact of life and here to stay. My comments encompass several games of the past decade . . not just 233.
Russ
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Torvanus
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 3:22 PM
Subject: [mepbmlist] 2950 -233
Russman, Halo 2 crash or something 
They would have lost in any event in 233. SG's inaction did not keep
Dol Guldur in DrL hands until turn 20ish. The DS out camped, out
armyed and flat out played the FP. That game should of ended many
turns before it did.
I think it was 2-1 split with Rhun bankrupting/dropping as a neutral
and the WW doing his ring quest.
Besides, I generally piss-off about 75% of my allies on any given
turn so you all had to put up with me, no small feat.
We had a great CL also.
--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, "RKF" <rkfloyd@c...> wrote:
> There's always these great examples of how OK it is to play with
prisoners. The examples always come from someone who hasn't just lost
a game with prisoners on their side. Everytime my side wins a game in
which a prisoner or two was on the other side, I have to listen to
the other side cheapen our victory by saying something like "Well, if
we hadn't had prisoners it would have turned out very
different . . ." So if we're ok with prisoners lets stop using them
for crutches! I guess it's easy to blame them as they can't reply to
the emails.
>
> Russ
>
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]
Hey, I've never blamed 233 on our prisoner... It was all my fault. An ally suggested I recruit troops and attack Mordor - I called him a hooligan. Another asked me for my xml - I sent him a bill. A third had the audacity to opine that Northern Gondor might be better served naming fewer emisary/mages named after toddlers and more commanders. I told him that was horsecrap.
Brad Brunet
···
RKF <rkfloyd@charter.net> wrote:
What you said was basically what my ambiguous point was about. If a team would have won anyways, let's stop moaning about who had a prisoner and who didn't. It looks like prisoners are a fact of life and here to stay. My comments encompass several games of the past decade . . not just 233.
Russ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Occasionally, just occasionally I find you guys a breath of fresh air... I like the occasional rant myself - good for the heart I hear.
Nice one Brad. I'll be looking for the off-map PCs in our Grudge game...
Clint
Hey, I've never blamed 233 on our prisoner... It was all my fault. An ally suggested I recruit troops and attack Mordor - I called him a hooligan. Another asked me for my xml - I sent him a bill. A third had the audacity to opine that Northern Gondor might be better served naming fewer emisary/mages named after toddlers and more commanders. I told him that was horsecrap.
Brad Brunet
···
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.6 - Release Date: 07/02/05
I'll be looking for the off-map PCs in our Grudge game...
Clint
···
ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com> wrote:
*****
Well, since you have all my end game info on file, you already know it's called Khardoff, is in West Gondor, made by the emissary The Green Lantern, and currently has HC in st/mi building there under the commander William. Beware of the blind challenge possibility (I've written about this secret strategy in Bree, Laurence doesn't believe in it therefore...) from Ahsminoff, the newly named Woodman mage.
Brad the Freep
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<<I told him that was horsecrap.>>
Hehe! Better than Mumakcrap I guess . . .
Russ
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Brad Brunet
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] 2950 -233
Hey, I've never blamed 233 on our prisoner... It was all my fault. An ally suggested I recruit troops and attack Mordor - I called him a hooligan. Another asked me for my xml - I sent him a bill. A third had the audacity to opine that Northern Gondor might be better served naming fewer emisary/mages named after toddlers and more commanders. I told him that was horsecrap.
Brad Brunet
RKF <rkfloyd@charter.net> wrote:
What you said was basically what my ambiguous point was about. If a team would have won anyways, let's stop moaning about who had a prisoner and who didn't. It looks like prisoners are a fact of life and here to stay. My comments encompass several games of the past decade . . not just 233.
Russ
[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]
Ouch, the names hurt...
Clint (player)
I'll be looking for the off-map PCs in our Grudge game...
···
Clint
*****
Well, since you have all my end game info on file, you already know it's called Khardoff, is in West Gondor, made by the emissary The Green Lantern, and currently has HC in st/mi building there under the commander William. Beware of the blind challenge possibility (I've written about this secret strategy in Bree, Laurence doesn't believe in it therefore...) from Ahsminoff, the newly named Woodman mage.
Brad the Freep
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.6 - Release Date: 07/02/05