I agree with Ed on some points. The GSI Fog was rather fun at times. I more than once posed as another person or even another nation. In all honesty, I never used it for tactical reasons. It was more out of jest and just "messing with the minds" of my enemies. Like Ed, I felt this sort of subterfuge was "encouraged" by the wording of the rules and the attitudes of GSI. Hey, they warned you about it every game! 
My funnest occasion of dual identity was my first game in which I played the WW. My friend signed up as the Khand (his 1st game, too) and he was attacked very early by the DS. I was young and inexperienced with the game and couldn't believe he was attacked in such a manner. I, with my stupid newbie big-mouth ways, had words with the DS over it. A couple turns later, I used another email address and "answered" the DS's initial response card to me in such a way they KNEW this "new" identity was the recipient of their 3x5 card. Pretty soon, they believed the initial WW they had spoken to was a phony and they had now contacted the true WW. I completely reestablished my neutrality with them. To what tactical advantage? None, really. It was "fun". I had a blast writing to them from BOTH my identities and seeing how they treated each one all the while knowing they were scratching their heads in paranoid bewilderment.
Hey, give me a break . . I was a teenager getting my giggles and puzzling my enemy. I soon broke the charade and told them. We even teamed up in several later games despite our rocky intros.
It was always fun sending out the 3x5 cards to all my allies and putting little "secret passwords" or some such on them so we could confirm identities. It was a blast seeing what "anonymous" cards one would receive each turn from their enemies (or were they enemies? 
I received some really strange cards at times.
Yeah, Ed, you're not the only one who misses the "good old days" from time to time. Things change, though. I'm surprised we're all still here playing mepbm at all a decade later. Will we be here in 2015? I expect the game to be so advanced that it pays ME to watch IT play itself by then.
Russ
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Ovatha Easterling
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Open Games
Don's comment on the (sometimes) unsatisfactory bature of 'open' games is
correct. Darrell's comment on the best coordinated team always winning is
also correct. These perceptive comments are inter-related. There is a
solution. Relatively easy and I know it worls because I have seen it work.
You decrease team coordination and increase the fog-of-war thusly:
One: Extract the mini-teams from the 'open' game. Instant reduction in
coordination. These now have a separate category..
Two: Do not provisde everyone with each other's idenitity. Reduced
communication and more uncertainty.
Sound familiar to anyone? That is how GSI ran their games. Of course since
GSI allowed players to misrepresent themselves (page one last paragraph) it
also allows predators (like myself) to stalk the jungle. I have already
shocked and dismayed our noble GM a dozen or more times, what's one more?
Ed Mills
>From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
>Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Open Games
>Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 14:34:21 -0700
>
>I think this comment is somewhat harsh. There are different levels of play
>(there always has been) and some teams gel together better than others. I
>balance that as best I can but often there's little that can be done. Join
>with allies you trust if you can and choose a region of the game to focus
>on. Games that end early aren't such a problem - (as a player winning a
>game is nice, losing is annoying, but I'm ready for the next challenge),
>sometimes teams just get outplayed and that can be dazzling brilliance or
>less than dazzling brilliance for the other team. One change is that
>players do concede the game more quickly (on average) as they perceive when
>a game has been lost - how to change that perception is outside our remit
>really.
>
>If you want sparkling communication join the Greek team - they write 500
>emails a turn! If you want team-work join the GM team (less brilliance but
>lovely team-work but it won't be everyone's cup of tea!). If you want to
>be the best be the Aussies. If you want to play your own game and develop
>the nation in some level of team-work but also a format that enables you to
>control your own nation then the individual format is still the best.
>
>Improving peoples play ability won't necessarily make games longer - it
>will just make players play better. That can include realising that a game
>is lost and conceding earlier than less experienced player (for example).
>
>Making players more tenacious - well I'm not sure how to do that - nor am I
>sure it's best for the game in all situations. Having an agreement between
>two teams could work well but probably better for Grudge games. Having
>Veteran and other formats might work, I'm happy to try that for example if
>there's player support.
>
>I think discussing this is very worthwhile and could bring in some great
>benefits.
>
>Clint
>
>
> >OK, nobody would mind short games if they were short because of dazzling
>FP
> >military genius. Nobody that I've heard saying "I only (or from now on
> >I'll only) play grudge games" have been reacting that resolution due to
> >that kind of situation. We're talking about the increasingly common
> >experience of the deadly dull game, where a conclusion has come about due
> >to one team playing very poorly. The game I used as an example has just
> >ended on turn 8.
>
>
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
