Are there any?
I noticed that in the GSI days games seemed to go longer than they do now.
Is there a set of victory conditions which are used to forced games to end other than the one ring condition and all nations eliminated or quit???
i.e. when there are only 3 nations on a side left, or one side out numbers the other 3 to 1 or some such??? Or is it that now adays when one side looks to have the upper hand the whole other team just tends to quit instead of fighting it out???
See ya,
Ken
I’m not sure if there are new “cut-off” conditions enforced by ME Games but my suspicion is that players are simply dropping when it becomes apparent that the game is not competitively balanced. I’ve experienced that often enough in games I’ve been in. Even among those who don’t drop, many tend to lose interest and simply finish out the game so as not to be labelled a quitters. I’ve seen that before as well (indeed I’ve done that before myself).
My own view is that the standard team games tend to become too one-sided, with one side highly organized and competitive and the other not. The solution in my opinion is to play grudge games or Gunboat games.
Information technology. Increased and faster communication. In the “old days”, people sent in orders, got pdf’s back, repeated the process until they won, lost, or ran out of money. A goodly portion of the time, players had less knowledge of the world outside their pdf than current Gunboat players do now! This was how it was, and players kept going, games went longer.
Now, everyone knows whats going on everywhere (at least they should…). Once the writing is on the wall, they cash it in for a fresh start elsewhere. Mind you, there are still many players from the deep dark past who still play the game the old way with precious little regard for the changes brought about by the Internet and Email. Often, I’m quite wary when confronted by a player claimed “ancient” experience, as they more often than not prove “ancient” stereotypes of selfish, VP, and incommunicative play to be truer than newer players…
Oh, to answer your direct quesion: nothing has changed outside the actual rulebook itself - MEGames doesn’t “hand moderate” game ends according to any set of rules. A player campaign to make changes over and above the rules (when certain ratios of surviving nations were hit, like 2:1 or 3:1, etc) was met with little interest over the summer and wasn’t implemented.
Kitirat: There was an article in the old “Whispers” entitled "Tenacity in Adversity’ which detailed the psychological pressures that cause players to drop a game. Those forces may still apply.
Player: You don’t see any company policies and practices that may encourage ‘churning’?
I think it depends on the game itself. Sometimes the game is one in which you really haven’t enjoyed yourself all along and when a significant number of players decide to pack it in you do so as well just to get a chance at another game. In some of the at large games you may be teamed up with guys that you do not get along well with and are only sticking it out to not screw those guys in the game with which you do get on well with. In other games you may have been the whipping boy and are just tired of having your butt kicked every two weeks.
On the other hand you may be in a game that has gone well for you and your nation is strong and there are a few other stout hearts that don’t want to go quietly. Fighting against the odds can be a good learning experience. You can still make it hard on the enemy. Especially if those who want to quit and understand that you don’t make their treasuries and best characters available to you die hards before they go. In this situation there is still a lot of fighting to be done before the victor can claim his laurels.
In the second scenario it is not a bug hunt, it is instead the glory of going down fighting but taking as many of the hated enemy with you as you can. I feel that as long as you can offer a challenging resistance and feel like fighting on you should be allowed to do so. If you are just running and hiding and trying to maintain at least one major town with your emissaries give it up and let everyone get on to a new game. However if you are killing their characters, taking and or exchanging population centers and have a nation capable of fighting in the open and not just running fight on as long as you wish. If you’re badly outnumbered they should wear you down fairly quickly anyway, the challenge is making them play a cohesive team strategy to take you out.
Originally posted by Arthedain73
Player: You don’t see any company policies and practices that may encourage ‘churning’?
I don’t know what you’re referring to…“churning”…?
Company policies and practices “should” be directed towards extending the length of games, if for no other reason than increased revenue.
“Churning” is a money term meaning to encourage into excessive activity, usually for financial gain.
If they “churn” by trying to fill vacant positions, thus extending the life of a game such that they don’t have to end by turns 15-20 all the time, then it works well, no?
Are game length and turn-volume-per-month identical concepts?
Meditate awhile before answering. I don’t want you locked into defending a hasty position. It would be best if we went off list.
Originally posted by Nimdraug
My own view is that the standard team games tend to become too one-sided, with one side highly organized and competitive and the other not. The solution in my opinion is to play grudge games or Gunboat games.
The longest, most competitive games I’ve played recently have been standard games. My last grudge match ended with the enemy surrendering on T13.
That shouldn’t happen in a good grudge match, of course, but it doesn’t need to happen in a good standard game, either.
Now, everyone knows whats going on everywhere (at least they should…). Once the writing is on the wall, they cash it in for a fresh start elsewhere
What happened to the spines of all these warmongers?
Sure, it doesn’t make sense to stand on a sinking ship, or to win through sheer endurance of time and money, but I read about those far more often than I see them. What I do see is lots of veterans who give up as soon as the other side gets more neutrals – even in games where the underdog eventually wins.
The whole premise of LoTR is that an underdog can prevail, and this is a wonderfully complex game. Players who say they can see the end well in advance are kidding themselves, and perhaps missing a good game.
The best games I’ve been in were standard games. All the grudge games I’ve been in ended up with the other side quitting around turn 13 - 20… odds are that one grudge team is more organized than the other than thus one side throws in the towel en masse. A standard game tends to actually be a little more balanced in terms of organization, and inevitably when someone quits, others are far more ready to pick up a position and continue the fight.
I’ve heard that many games end around turn 20; if so, I find that somewhat depressing since the best games I’ve been in were long games that my side was “losing” and did, in fact, lose. There were numerous reversals during the course of those games with one side or the other gaining the upper hand, then falling, etc.
Agents are nice, but they’re not everything. There are enough ways of dealing with them (especially getting your own) that I’ve never found them to be overwhelming… even when the other side has singled you out for special attention. (This assumes that your allies will help). I’ve seen opposing nations reduced to three characters and rebuild a few times, I’ve seen others flattened economically then “reappear” a dozen turns later with a few armies. It simply isn’t that hard to go hide, lick your wounds, and return.
As for emissaries… I’ve fought that sort of war as well, flipping population centers constantly. Why should that be “wasting everyone’s time” as opposed to marching in with an army or sending agents in? It keeps the enemy busy while I build up my armies and/or agents for another attack.
The point of the game is to have a good time and take the hated enemy with you when you’re losing. (I agree with Brad Jenson’s comments completely). Not say “oh, I can’t ‘win’ so I’ll just go play another game.” Hasn’t anyone ever had fun playing Poland in a WWII game? Or France? Why do people take Rhudaur and go dark? Or play the Dragon Lord at all? You KNOW you’re going to get flattened, yet many people take those positions anyway because they’re fun.
I am presently in a game where any number of players on the other side are throwing in the towel because “too many neutrals joined the darks”. It’s turn 6. Good grief, an evil Rhudaur has been flattened, the Dragon Lord flattened, and the Witch King is next on the chopping block alongside the northern half of the Easterlings. The game is technichally 14 to 11, but it’s more like 12 to 11. The Gondors have their hordes marching on Mordor while on the Free side, the Eothraim and Northmen have been lightly damaged. I think the Dragon Lord burned a Sinda city before being thrown out. The woodmen lost a town to the Witch King. The Free have the Ring of Curfin, the Ring of Wind, and (should) have Tinculin. They’re better organized than we are, but a fairly large portion of their team is throwing in the towel on turn 7. Hmmmm, if I had to guess the players quitting would be the Eothraim (under pressure in Rhovanion), the Northmen (fighting the Easterlings now), Southern Gondor (attacked by the Corsairs and Harad), and the Sinda (lost a city, now losing a town).
Bah. The same philospohy applied to a sports contest would have the Tampa Bay Buccaneers down six points five minutes into the first quarter and throwing in the towel “because there’s no point.” It’s one thing to concede after a long, hard-fought battle, where one side has been devestated and all that remains is mopping up the wreakage of those ruined nations. Its another to quit when nintey percent of the opposing team is untouched, and the other ten percent have a few scratches.
I lost a town/fort and three Ice King camps within three (four?) turns of starting a game because the Gondors came for me. My economy was in shambles. I had fewer population centers than I started the game with (down to two?). Apparently I should have quit and started a new game as the Ice King rather than riding it out and plotting my revenge.