If you had one wish for Middle-earth what would it be? Ie gamewise what would you like to see done? Maybe a new SNA, update of a nation, new scenario, 3d graphics? 
Just curious…
Clint (GM)
On-line interface that allows for 24hr turnaround at a cost reflective of the game’s automated nature - low low LOW!
I guess I’m just going to have to be greedy and ask for more than one - both to do with 4th Age.
First up I’d like more varied SNAs that can be used with 4th Age. In practice there are only a certain number that are deemed really good and a number that are deemed filler. There are a number of new interesting SNAs that I can think of that would be good for the game, but until now the response has been - its a coding change and will have to wait. I have ideas if you want them.
Second I’d like the encounters in 4th Age to have a good going over. Replace the stuff like the generic Volcano encounter with something much more flavourful. It would be good to turn some of these encounters into quests that individual characters can go on to receive a prize rather than a one turn response.
Gavin
I would like to see a new item on the Council of Wise voting form that allows the ranking of “all” teammates from 1 to 5 under communication or teamwork.
This way we can view how all players stack up as compiled by their peers. I think this carries more weight among players than who wins.
Dan
On-line interface that allows for 24hr turnaround at a cost reflective of the game’s automated nature - low low LOW!
To put this into some sort of perspective: this might cost us $50+k to sort out and $60k upkeep per year, plus addional development. Bit beyond us at present and wouldn’t deal with the Person-Person approach needed to look after the game.
First up I’d like more varied SNAs I’d be interested to see a list. Maybe we can do this on a separate list as it would be cute to see.
Second I’d like the encounters in 4th Age I’m doing encounters for KS at present, they take a LOT more time to create than players think.
- Balance; ie each of them needs appropriate level of balance. I can see why 1000 is lacking in these, the way it was coded was a right pain and stripping that out to make it efficient has taken us a lot of work. We might have a front end that will enable players to create encounters sometime in the year though.
- Literature - ie it needs to have a high standard of written word (better than I can do!) and in the correct tenses. Took a long time to sort that out.
- Interest. It has to be different/interesting.
- Codable - ie simple enough. I did a very cute encounter like a joust, but my it took too much coding and I removed it myself…
Most of the old GSI have around 6-15 options. The ones we’ve been working have more. - Longevity - they have to have a long enough lifetime to be worth while. If meeting Bilbo you know to say “Frodo” to gain 20 stats then that’s going to be the one players pick.
It’s been an interesting journey checking this out.
I would like to see a new item on the Council of Wise voting form
I’ll ponder that for the future.
Clint
Guards actually stopping an assassination or gold theft. And I guess when the stop it I would just like to see the other agent killed rather than spotted. I know this detracts from the dark servants more so than the free. This is a tired subject that has gone around and around the discussion board many times, but you said if you could have one wish. One of my teammates said he had a natural 100 agent killed when he did a guard in a game. I seriously doubt the opposing agent was over 200 in artifacted agent skill points.
Tim
Buyer beware - no person to person approach required. Sign the disclaimer and go to town. Add some know issues (ie, 935 and entering the wrong arty ID, etc) and say “You’re on your own!”. Allow for manual override of order entry when xml’s fail to produce. Of course, sometime around 2028 when this is up and running, we won’t have “those” kinds of issues anyway…
The game designers for Kin Strife read a couple of books on the War of the Roses and review its simulation, the old board game “Kingmaker”. If these inspire either imagination or imitation, then the KS will be a good game.
Buyer beware - no person to person approach required. Sign the disclaimer and go to town.
Reckon that would lead to players being lost in short order… I can quote other PBM companies doing this and all the PBM companies that are still successful are ones with lots of player support in the form of active GMs and player-GM contact being heavy.
KingmakerYeh played Kingmaker a fair bit, it’s a good but dated boardgame IMO. KS is not going to be that. I do like Politics in a game (check out “Kremlin” for a very interesting variant of Kingmaker Politics). There’s lots of clones and pre-cursors to KM on the market. Puerto Rico is a great game that uses elements of player interaction, both in the form of “alliances” and stuffing players over.
Guards: How to upgrade the FP then? This has come up a lot, as you’ve mentioned, but how to get it to be balanced. You can’t just reduce the FP without either upgraging them in a different manner, or downgrading the DS. Well you could, but if you did FP would then win a lot more as I can see no real way to stop the hordes of FP troops winning the game.
Keep 'em coming guys. It’s interesting to get a pulse on what players want, even if most of it we can’t do, there’ll be elements that we can do.
Clint
I’m only talking about the 24 hr turn around “buyer beware”. You can still hand hold and spoon feed the 1 week games, 2 week games, Gunboat, Alliance, WOTR, 1650, 2950, FA, KinStrife, etc, blah blah…
Pretty simple - using a potentially existing Java based program that absorbs information and allows for Order creation and exporting, hook up to an automated program that processes the turns and exports results to a folder synced with the aforementioned interface. Disclaimer details known issues, etc. Any problems, questions, etc, won’t be dealt with in a timerly manner within game, give an SLA of 72 hours, etc. Capital investment for set up and after that you might have to hand hold the game starts (line up here, we’ll notify you of start time, etc…) and then off we go to issue daily orders hands free on your part. It’s mostly residual income… Really, this is one of the directions to move in, not really clear on your arguments. Initial set up costs I appreciate, the rest…???
Most games still have at least one player running non-AMEOW turns. That takes a fair bit of infrastructure to support. Our reminders also take up time as we find that without them players have a tendency to miss more turns. Edits take more time again etc. These are all difficult to automate.
We’ve got the webmail server and presently converting the software so that it can be run on PC and then we should be able to automate it more. It’s not as simple as it might first seem. If it were then I’d need a bunch less staff!
24hr turnaround - not sure that would be good for the game. It’s a game that takes thought. Okay in GB I do my orders in 5 -15 minutes but that’s not normal. Diplomacy, sharing of information, planning, etc are what sell the game and make it what it is. They all take time. I can see if with game 77 (testing the new software at present) that players quickly get burnt out and that’s not enjoyable for them. I don’t think that would be the best way to go. FTF players manage a turn every 1h15-30m and that’s fast pace with less players. They’re usually zonked by the end of the w/end - imagine something similar long term.
Clint
I can imagine a 24 hour turnaround game. All that hand holding you’re talking about Does Not Apply!
Once you have a fully automated internet interface, it’s simply a matter of adjusting a setting. This is a “wish list” thread, why are you bickering about present reality? I don’t get it - when this is technologically feasible, I guarantee you you’ll be doing it… GuaranTEE! 
There are a number of free games like that on the Internet - I’m not sure that’s how I’d want things to go. One of the great things about ME is being able to assess things in a team and to help each other out. The short turn around of those games (and the fact the are free) makes people care less about them.
Just my 2c worth.
Gavin
Come home, make dinner, play with the kids, wash the dishes, brush teeth, put kids to bed, wander downstairs, log in, check turn, spend 10 minutes contemplating, check Instant Message diplo function if you care, create orders, double check, click Submit, go to bed.
I know of 4 or 5 players right now who could and would do that if possible yesterday. Think about it… Gavin, you don’t have to play.
One Wish for MEPBM?
Overhaul the army/combat system as follows:
- when an army commander is killed (by challenge, assassination, combat, or heart attack), the army promotes the next in command to be the new commander. It has always struck me as silly that armies disband because the commander is killed. The newly promoted army commander would be a C10. They can issue orders the turn they appear on the character sheet.
Is this seriously destabilizing (disadvantage DS)? I don’t think so. Especially if taken in combination with the suggestions below (see #2) where I suggest that command rank should matter more for armies. Also note that the Challenge and/or assassination also penalizes the victimized army:
a. the remaining army commander orders for the turn in question don’t happen. i.e. if the commander dies due to challenge, his army still doesn’t attack or move, and if the commander dies due to assassination, the army doesn’t move.
b. the nation who lost the commander now has a C10 character taking up a slot in their character ranks.
- Adjust the value of different troop types, armor & weapons such that naked HI weren’t the defacto choice for almost all recruiting, unless naked HC can be recruited. Specifically:
a. armor & weapons should have much more benefit in improving morale;
b. weapons should give more advantage on attack strength,
c. armor more advantage on constitution,
d. terrain modifications per troop type should have a more pronounced effect
e. an army with a nice combination of troop types should gain effectiveness in both strength and constitution as the troop types support each other on the battlefield
f. low morale should be a BIG problem and increase chances of a “rout” unless the command rank of the commander is high
g. LC should move a bit farther in a fortnight than HC. AR & LI should move a bit farther in a fortnight than HI & MA
h. recruiting naked and/or wooden armed troops should lower the loyalty of the pop center in which they’re recruited. Bronze should not affect pop center loyalty, and Steel & Mithril should increase pop center loyalty (Mithril a bit more)
Net, the common practice of having a C10A20 lead naked HI into combat should be a DISASTER.
- As to guards - I may be the loan wolf in the wilderness, but gaurds actually work well for me. they do stop attacks. they do injure/kill the attacking agent. they’re not 100% and neither is it 100% to be trying the assass. but a guard in the 40s and certainly 50+ works well against all but the highest level attacking agents. Given the above changes, I don’t see any need to change the agent/guard code.
Dave
I like weapons and armour improving morale.
Armies of multiple troop types might only increase performance using Standard, or some other “new” tactic type that requires the Order to actually benefit from…? (not a default…)
Promote a c10 to lead the army, yes, troops reductions from desertion should be a factor of the difference in command rank - ie, lose a 30com and you lose less troops going to a 10com than if you lose a 70com.
re: online vs. PB(e)M:
the problem that I have with online games is the lack of thought, lack of preparation, and non-existent attention to detail. Brad, your scenario of 10 minutes of contemplation is spot-on for an online game (many of which are all twitch and no contemplation, but 10 minutes is a long time online), but is way too little contemplation for this game. I almost always contemplate turns over the course of 24 hours, if not several days.
cheers,
dave
Single nation Gunboat? Once Turn 1 is run, the next 5 are already chalked up. And if I make rushed mistakes, so do the other 24… 3 weeks is 21 turns of fully automated turnstyle income for the company and a bang-bang hoot of a game for me and whomever else is playing…
This is exactly my issue … you don’t have to think to play. If I wanted that I wouldn’t be paying ME Games for my fun, I’d have registered for one of these free games and saved myself alot of money in the process. There are games that do that, but I don’t think Middle Earth is one of them. Sure you CAN write your orders in 10 minutes flat, but I don’t think you appreciate the game as much by doing that.
Gavin
Plus, a 24 hour turnaround game gives no options for real life events.
Parent/uncle/nephew passed away and must go to the funeral …
“Darn, forgot it was our anniversary, darling … I just HAVE to get my turn in today … can’t we celebrate in 2 weeks?”
“I have to pick up Junior from hockey practice and drop Suzy off at soccer, then go watch lil Bobby’s bball game?”
A 72 hour turnaround, maybe, but not 24 hours. That just isn’t feasible. A wish for some, a nightmare for others.