Because of the games nature a drop or uninformed play in certain
crucial
positions has a far greater affect than in some others. Such a
handicap can
ensure defeat of a side before the game has got going. It seems
only fair to
all the experienced players that they get a fair crack at having a
good game
so restricting positions for new players seems only fair. On
principle I
dislike restricting positions but it seems to be in everyones
interest,
including the soon to be experienced newbies, to have not have a
game ruined
by drop outs on turn 1 particularly if you only apply those
restrictions
until a player has played 5 consecutive turns and allow them to
take over
drop outs.
I agree.
A good newbie starting position should also be economically secure
and,
ideally, engage people in the game quickly. Whether a position is
deemed
good or bad is irrelevant as peoples opinions vary so much.
Neutrals should
be excluded on the basis that they do not engage people with the
whole game.
As a second game position I would always suggest a neutral, so
people can
experiment with their own theories, but not as a first.
I don't think the opinions vary that much. I think the opinions of
those who write on this list vary but the poll of the readers would
indicate otherwise. Every experienced player I game with agrees
that certain nations should not be recommended to new players. Some
laught at the idea of a new player in control of the CL or Noldo.
With these in mind I
would suggest the following in order of preference-
Free- Dwarves, Cardolan, Noldo, Northmen, Arthedain.
DS- Quiet Avenger, Blind Sorcerer, Cloud Lord.
I agree with Dwarves, Cardolan, Northmen, Arthedain, and BS. Quiet
Avenger I wouldn't recommend since it is a diplomacy nation with
Corsairs and Harad to the west and Easterlings to the east. Cloud
Lord and Noldo I think should not be recommended at all costs. New
players, first timers, don't understand that Noldo has 4 of the 5
good Free People mages who start with or can learn LAT. Nothing
worse for a team than getting a first timer who doesn't process
turns or communicate, plays this position as a military nation, and
who hordes gold/MTs instead of supporting front line nations. This
nation is a gold/MT, agent power, and Freep LAT king. It's too
complex for 90% of new players out there.
As far as the Cloud Lord, this is another key nation who seems to
have a constant flow of new players naming those multiskill
characters(as opposed to 40 agents), not supporting their allies
with gold, putting mithril/mithril on that starting army and going
military, not understanding the agent game and getting frustrated at
the complexity and dropping. In my last two solo games, one as a
team member and one as the enemy. The game as a Freep we stormed
Mordor so quickly that it was boring. As the Northmen I took out
the Cloud Lord without consequence to my characters.
If you want total team control then you need to join a team of
like minded
individuals. Non team games are a random lottery of different play
styles
and choices and do not require, as some seem to think, slavish
devotion to
the current fashion for the 'correct' way to play the game.
Most people who have supported a recommendation that certain
positions not be recommended or certain positions should, aren't
looking for total team control. They are looking for a better game
and see a possiblity in improving the average game if Clint follows
through with recommendations for new players or at least not
recommending certain positions be recommended unlike the article in
Bree 1.
Sure, help people to learn in their first game in good positions
but leave
random games in the lap of the gods. In my experience you get one
rubbish
game, one indifferent one and one great battle out of every three.
Since I am paying(like everyone else) I prefer to have a good game,
every game, not every 3rd.
Shoving
people into pigeon holes may remove the bad games but I suspect
the good
ones may go too.
I don't think anyone wants to shove new players into the corner.
There are just positions that are better suited for them, easier to
learn the game and get enjoyment from it, and then player
retention. Then there are positions that are confusing resulting in
frustration and dropping. I've seen this time and time again.
Playing in uniformly ranked teams against other, uniformly
ranked teams in the currently approved correct style of play all
sounds a
bit utopianlly tedious to me ('we'll all drop if you don't play in
the style
we demand' implies a bunch of poor players if you can't carry one
weak one.
Sounds like someone got to be a scapegoat for a sound thrashing.
Usually it
is the Noldo who get the blame if no one else can be found.).
1650 is very chess like. Not every position needs to be played a
certain way. There are positions though like the Noldo and CL that
play a major factor on how the game goes. If Noldo doesn't get
those LAT's off, the DS will get Ring of Wind, Curufin, and curse
artifacts. New players normally don't have the ability to see the
overall game but instead only focus on their nation and their
nation's map. These two positions need players that can understand
the overall game and what's going on everywhere not just his nation
and map.
Now in response to your we'll all drop if you don't play statement:
Imagine you are a DS and have armies swarming Mordor. One new
player decides to drop(a player you have spent much time helping him
learn the game but drops because the position is confusing). The
next turn another players drops(who you spent hours talking on the
phone with and exchanging lengthy e-mail with to make sure he knows
what is going on in the game). On the same turn the CL who lost Ji
Indur and two other agents (because he didn't know he had to refuse
challenge while in a company) tells your team he may drop because he
is discouraged by this. This is the same player who by midgame has
only done two assassinations. Also, he has horded gold and several
of your teammates are on the verge of bankruptcy. Well, he let's
your team know that he'll let you know in the next week whether or
not he'll drop. Next week you hear nothing from this player.
Again, armies are swarming Mordor. Both passes have fallen and
interior MTs are about to fall. Your only defense is agents, but
you have this problem, your CL is playing his first game and not
responding to any e-mails from the team. You send several e-mails
yourself trying to find out whether this player is dropping or not.
At this point you make an error in judgement and assume that this
new player has dropped(normally a safe judgement after seeing this
same thing happen game after game). Your CL replacement player
spends hours figuring out what is going on in the game. Everything
is coming together and plans within plans are made. Then you get
your turns back and find the new player hadn't dropped after all.
You find the new player is communicating with Clint but not talking
to anyone on the team. Finally several days later the CL contacts
you(only after Clint has contacted him to contact you) and is mad at
you for finding a replacement player. Hmmm...
The statement I made to this new player at this point was logical.
The game would be over and he would find himself playing alone
because of his lack of communication he probably wouldn't find out
the game was over until several turns later. This is a much
different circumstance than what you have infered, you aren't
playing our way so we quit. It's, we thought you had dropped, found
a replacement player, you aren't communicating or planning, you are
playing the main position that can possibly defend Mordor, we need
this position or the game is over.
I even went as far to explain to this player at this time that this
position was a very difficult one and I wouldn't have done well with
it my first game either. I suggest Arthedain, Cardolan, and other
beginner friendly nations. His response was that the Bree 1 article
suggested that he play this position and I was a jerk. Thus my
posting on this list to try and maybe fix this error for future
gamers and for current gamers.
