Of course, I believe this is all moot because there
ain't no way GSI is going to invest any time in the
program at this late date.
But I'll weigh in out of my idleness, and say that
the popular vote would be very unpopular with me.
In addition to the objection that it would have
element of a popularity contest, I would raise
these objections:
1) A team of 4 would be able to vote themselves
into office whereas a solo player or team of one
would be disadvantaged.
2) The vote will be based on what is outwardly
perceivable, and what other players happen to
perceive. If some player is extra busy for two
weeks they may well miss my star effort.
2a) A corralary to this is that some of the
players who really want to win may end up
being brown-nosers or at least just becoming
their own pitchmen, so everyone knows of their
accomplishments and contributions
3) Some players put more value on military
participating, some on willingness to give up
resources, etc. Why should each player's final
tally be at the mercy of whatever style of play
the other players favor most?
As a final note, I'll say if part of the reason
for re-thinking VP's is to try to make lesser nations
more appealing to play, that as a player who's
tried all of the 1650 dark servants more than once,
and about half of the FP at least once, I can tell
you that nothing you do to the VP's will ever entice
me to play most of the FP's again. It isn't the
dragons, it isn't the agents (though I don't like
the agents), it is the FP nations themselves.
I find them soooo dull, except for the Sinda.
Jeremy Richman
--- In mepbmlist@y..., LBear <ditletang@c...> wrote:
> If keeping score of damage to the enemy isn't possible (of which
claim I am
> still not convinced, as the game already tracks number of
characters killed)
> then perhaps the only way to reward effective team play is by vote
of
> players in the game near the end.
The vote has been quite popular.
My issues with the vote:
1)not often enough players at the end still active, those who are
could be pick-
ups at some mid point....
2)the unpopular guy who doesn't choose his word properly, if at all,
may very
well deserve it, but won't get it...
What I would really prefer to see, is a carry-over of the Individual
Scoring
onto the account number. For simplicity, continue with my silly
Stand Deviation
example . each player would have a "ranking", like a sports seeding.
One guy
may have a rank of 2.45, another 1.23 , that sort of thing. (i'd be
in the
-1-0-1 range...).
Personally, I'm a numbers guy, and would like to see individual
rankings of all
the players! Hey, my internet chess site does it, why can't we?
I'd like to
···
On Fri, 09 March 2001, "Winn Keathley" wrote:
know who I'm playing with and against.........
Regards,
Brad Brunet
__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com
