If I may, I was a part of the Last Alliance game. There are a couple of things that I think need to be looked at in that scenario. I did enjoy the scenario, and may even play in another, but my belief is that the scenario is heavily weighted towards the FP. I think the biggest weakness of the DS is something that I guess is the premise of the game. With the lack of a foreward front (no WK or DrLo outside of Mordor) not only is the DS visibility reduced to nil, there are also several FP nations that there is literally NO pressure on at all, and without the destruction of several other powerful nations, other than sending agents and emmies all the way across the map (which is a valid strategy) there is no way to get pressure on those nations. The economic imbalance is partially offset by the existance of the Black Numenorian nation, however, the drastic advantage that the FP have in economic and military might is enhanced. That is to say that the DS get better economic strength, but the FP's strength is even further enhanced. Also, I think that there are a couple of other things that lean FP. With the randomization of artifacts, the agent arties can get spread. With a single assassination (albeit, assassination of what should be the single hardest creature on the planet to assassinate) the FP can win the game. I will admit, I did not get a chance to look at the FPs turns, but it just seems to me from the layout that the advantage lays heavily, perhaps too heavily, with the FP. Anyone else who played in the game (or didnt) care to provide other input?
-Ken
···
From: Middle Earth PBM Games <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] New player positions for 1650
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:13:08 +0000> ** That's part of the beauty of the Waiting List system. It enables me to
> put players in appropriate positions. Eg I get some players asking to
> play
> nations next to their friends.
> RD: And there you hit the nail on the head, Clint. It is up to players
> to tell you what they want!
> If I say to you, "put me down for the next 1650 game," I would expect
> my team to comprise a mixed bag of players, some experienced, some new or
> new-ish. But if I said, "Put me down for the next 1650 game, but no
> newbies please," I would expect everyone on my team to have experience of
> at least one previous game.*** I can fill certain games but not others. You have to allow for the
fact that players who wait more than say 4 months for a game will very
often drop the game. The more "weird" the variant the harder it is to get
players for it. So I can run one game of WoTR variant, none of Last
Alliance (tried my darndest to get the second one going!), 4 of Gunboat
(the most successful variant so far if you don't count 12v12 Grudge games),
1 of 1wk 1650, no 1wk 2950. So putting - no newbies is very unlikely to
occur as we constantly get new players join.So we have to have certain restrictions on game creation and what variants
I can allow - just so that the game can get players for it. I am all for
players telling me what they want and us finding it for them, but some
restrictions on what games we can offer has to be made.Clint
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail