So. MEGames has the code and the license. Now…they can do anything they want in the Third and Fourth Ages… So what are they going to do? What should they do…? What should they most certainly NOT do…?
The 2nd Edition talks of a couple years ago on the mepbmlist produced many interesting ideas. Adjusting the combat tables, adding orders and spells, randomizing arty numbers and encounter responses, adding characters and pops, etc. It seems that most people have “issues” with the current game.
Ed, never having played under GSI, could you describe the Harley “accretions” you refer to. It’s difficult to understand what in your opinion has been changed to the detriment without knowing what went before.
Woody, this is probably something that needs an article in “News From Bree”. If Colin comes out of retirement I think I will prepare such an article.
The short answer is that the game was taken over by persons who did not understand it. As such they suffered from the “Law of Unintended Consequences” because they couls not fully predict all the ramifications on the delicate tissue that is Middle Earth. Now before I get jumped, I have a private communication from a high ranking person who acknowledges they did not understand the game.
Ed, I can’t seem to edit the poll in order to change wording, add or subtract. T’is what it t’is.
In regards to the “Similar Game, Different Map” option:
Consider taking exactly 1/4 the current map. From 0101 for example, that would extend to 2220 or so. Now simply double each hex in each direction and you’re back at 44X40 say. You’ve “blown up” or “zoomed in” to a section of the map. Basically, take a part and overlay a 44X39 hex grid on it, clean up the terrain where necessary to fit the lines and you have the potential for varied geography within a regional type scenario. This is the sort of thing I mean by this option, but certainly interpret at your leisure. As long as we’re dealing with Middle Earth and 3rd/4th ages (roughly the current map).
I like my zoom idea simply because it would provide for a completely different game as such. Twice as many hexes inbetween locales would imply that you have to appx double army troop type movement, for example, while there are now 4x the number of “routes” between locations. Minimum troop #'s might have to come down to reflect a smaller scale sitaution? More camps and villages, fewer Towns? Etc. This type of example doesn’t even have to qualify as “A whole new level of complexity” as the existing code could simply be rewritten to reflect new variable and/or parameter values, not necessarily new logarithms or rules.
When I voted in this poll, I voted for tweeks and corrections. I would like to explain what I mean. Corrections are obvious and honestly I think that MEGames is doing their best to fix anything that needs fixing. I applaud the effort they are putting in to making a cleaner game. Though personally I could do without the big brother stuff.
The tweeks I have one thing in mind I know most people don’t care about victory points but for bragging rights it is kind of fun…but as it stands now victory points are meaningless…they are aimed at people who like to build, but if they are changed to aim at people who do damage then they could mean alot more to the individual and the team. Basically something like characters killed, armies destroyed, pop centers taken/destroyed/threatened/influenced. I know there are a few nations this still excludes somewhat…the more information nations(noldo or others)…
I know that with there no longer being a reward for winning the victory points …let’s be honest we all look. Wouldn’t it make it more fun if they actually meant something valuable in a strategy based game???
Most people DO look at the VP’s. Some for reasons I simply can’t understand, and myself to determine some relative measure of the teams status vis a vis the Other team. If your top 3 are 850, 750, and 583 y’all best be thinking about another hobby. Give me 1150 and I don’t make the list, we’re doin’ okay.
There have been a few ideas floated to create “scoring” systems perse. Troops killed, money sent, etc, were the types of things commonly mentioned. I once proposed an Order by Order scoring system: points for every Skill order succeeding, more points for higher skill orders. Points for recruiting/dying/giving creating camps, etc. Tinkered with the numbers and came out with one hell of a difficult product to hand manage, but I did play-test it one game, comparing my Ice King ally to my own Dun nation. While my VP’s were quite high on the team mostly, his early game holocaust participation widened the “actual score” gap so badly that precious little could I do through the mid-game to catch up. Certainly rewarded “activity”.
This is unanswerable - there are cases to be made for all the options (except no change)
Tweaking and Correcting (e.g. the Ruingurth encounter and the apalling use of the English language in the turns.)
A whole new level of complexity? Yes, lets have army combat that isn’t a sad joke, lets have Dwarven cavalry made useless, but their infantry should be great. Elven archers the same as Dunlending ones? Rubbish!
Same game, new scenarios? Always - the scenario’s that have been added to the original 1650 game have enriched the whole MEPBM experience.
Similar game, new maps? Sort of the same as the last question - and obviously subject to licensing stuff. Personally I’d like to see games based in other areas of the Middle Earth world as defined by the ICE modules. Please don’t use the game engine to make a proper wargame though - the military and economic systems are too weak for that.
So discuss all this - but a poll is terribly misleading in my opinion.
Of course there are cases to be made for all…that’s why they’re included. Don’t dismiss those who can choose simply because they have a preference. Based on the assumption that all polls are misleading, make a choice of “most favourite” and let it be “fun and/or interesting” without having to be profound. Sheesh.
And there’s a case to be made for No Change also. Was that comment just a wee bit subjectively misleading, or was it personal against Ed? No place for that stuff, Ed likes being unpopular - if you don’t like him agree with him, drives him batty…
how about when stealing gold, you get no more then pop center produces at its current tax level. if you want more, go visit the captiol. not a big change, but its a bit realistic.( realism in a fantasy based game, ah the irony…)
randomize the artifacts. clearly, swords are weapons and palantirs are for scrying. but non weapon artifacts can have there properties changed shuffled about. it adds a bit of randomness to the game. not a lot, but enough. makes spell 412 worth something on a lesser mage.
interesting points on certain nations troop types. at start, it would make the dwarves really nasty if you jacked up there hi strength, as it would the eothraim. maybe their armor/weapons for there at start forces could be mithrilized for more damge/ staying power.
sinda pop centers. make them hidden, and the forces in them are hidden. you could move them 1 hex randonly centered on there current locations.
please, the dragon lord should get clobbered in mirkwood, but these sinda pop centeres have been undiscovered for generations, and it should be real tough to find them.
these are all small modifers, that have large implications in the game. like all things tinker a little, to see how it alters the average. too much tinker, and you get a different game in total. when considering we are writing about a game thats nearly 15 years old, i don’t think “playability” is the issue.
IMHO the longterm goal should be a real 2nd edition, like it is/was discussed at length on the mailing list and presented on mr. tilley’s website. There are more than enough proposals out there to make a whole new game. The first edition could be running along as long as it finds enough players.
As far as tweaking is concerned, I fear we will never get over the bug/feature discussion, so that will be reserved to the very obvious things.
For my part, I like to try out new things. I played every scenario/variant at least once and not many more than four times. I like something new from time to time and harly has managed to keep me at the game, discovering new things and having fun. I want that to continue, therefore a true 2nd edition gets my vote (and yes, this should include elven archers, dwarven hi and EO cav).
The worst bug in this game is agents and the kidnap order/battle capture…How to explain this…
Okay so here I am guarding Tarondor and Ji Indur takes a stab at kidnapping/assassinating him. My guard manages to capture him…is my guard axtually going to report back to the capital and say to his commander well yes sir I did have our mortal enemy in my hands no sir I did not automatically execute him…(in short we should be able to turn on and off an auto execute order)
This would also make more sense if they fixed the other bug in the game escaping are you telling me only agents know how to escape being kidnapped or captured in battle. A mage wouldn’t just use some spell to escape, a commander wouldn’t perhaps use his strength to escape, an emmisary wouldn’t talk his way around the guards? It is the stupidest, most improbable, and utter fiction to think that these characters would not use thier skill, meanwhile a 10 rank agent can manage to slip out of a 70 rank agents hands?
Escaping should be the some chance based on your best skill class over the other characters best skill class then a roll based on that…or something like it. This is one of the most serious problems in the game…it is what makes any Cloud lord player who assassinates NG and SG characters rather than kidnaps an idiot. It is also what makes any NG/SG player who makes commanders only soft in the head…So basically the NG special of naming 40 rank commanders becomes useless (that is if all CL players played right). It is akso dumb on the other side because the games says if I capture a 40 rank CL agent that tries to assassinate say Tarondor, Tarondor has no chance at all of getting him to Minas Tirith to imprison him even most of the time if he is at Minas Tirith…come on just a little silly?
Okay I will stop ranting…but this has bugged me and many of my friends for like 10 years…ick!
I hoped we could avoid this discussion over details. There are dozens of other examples one could complain about. You are talking about “realistic” things. Is it realistic for an agent to kill five guards and his target? Is it realistic that an agent can carry away 10.000 or more gold pieces? And so on.
You will never get to an end, because some like this game mechanics, some don’t. So IMHO theres no use in tweaking around here and there without the risk of spoiling a game so many people love. Have a real 2nd edition with all those things and many more corrected and leave the old game for those who like it. Thats my point.
We’re playing a fantasy game with dragons and magic swords… Realism has little to do with it. See the Flying Caravan bit on Tilley’s site regarding shipping 10,000 timber from one corner of ME to the other in a fortnight. Bernd’s got it right, essentially. Tweeking is a pandora’s box of detailed arguments waiting to pounce upon us with all the pettiness and pride that goes with such.
A 2nd Edition is an entirely new game.
Another option is adding to the game as it is. Instead of randomizing dragon and encounter responses, make new ones… Allow for recruitable NPC’s, imagine if you recruit a legendary hero he not only becomes a character on your pdf that you now issue orders to, BUT he also brings with him a town and army that represents his fiefdom, and of course whatever artifacts he’s carrying. And why can’t we use an FA style points system to create non-crucial characters or pops? I’m quite sure that many of the names and places are sourced from the imagination of the creators and not in Tolkein’s writings. The game had to be fleshed out, sure, so at this point, why not allow the Players to do the fleshing instead of accepting the artificial status quo…?
I voted “no changes.” Yet I favor tweaking. I also favor making a whole new game. Allow me to explain…
Playabilty, more than realism, or variety, or complexity, or anything else, is what makes for a good game. But as Smuller said, playability is not an issue. The game is already very playable and enjoyable for most players as attested by 15yrs of ardent play. So most if not all changes are unnecessary and will likely result in some upset players who will feel that the old game was more playable. So don’t change the game, simply make a 2nd edition and let players decide which version they want to play.
Now I think most players are like me insofar as they want what they hope will be a better version of MEPBM in the near future, NOT an entirely new game in the far-distant maybe-never future (assuming that we could ever get a majority consensus on how such a game should be). As smuller said, too much and tinker and you get an entirely different game…a game which probably won’t feel at all like MEPBM. So I think the second edition should include MINOR changes, including those few things which most players can agree on and which do not alter the flavor/feel/playability of the game. Since there are not many changes that will meet these criterion, the second edition would not include a huge number of changes…and that’s good if all people want is a new version of essentally the same game. If the second edition is successful then in time players might call for a third edition and the game can evolve slowly. Sort of how D&D changed over the years.
Here is an example of a minor tweak for a second edition: delete the early bankruptcy check that limits 315/320 orders and replace it with a limit on how much the nation can buy. Or just delete it and don’t replace it with anything.
Now, as for an entirely new game, if Harley wants to put in the time and you all want to see it done, then go for it. I don’t think it should be called MEPBM edition X. Alter the name of the game (if licensing permits) to refllect the fundamental difference between MEPBM and this entirely new game. Even if never completed, this project for creative masterminds might serve as source of ideas for new editions of an evolving MEPBM, and it can be an outlet for those who want shape middle earth like the Valar of old.
Actually I was not talking realism…perhaps I used the wrong words if that was how it came across I was talking logic…of course it is not realistic an agent can carry away 10000 gold pieces…but quite honestly in my opinon that is not a problem in the game…but allowing only one class of character to escape is a problem it is not a detail it is a flaw…or as microsoft likes to say it is a ‘feature’. Quite honestly you cannot ask a question about whether the game should be changed or not…is it not better for people to give examples of what they would like changed… As for a 2nd edition, if that is where the changes need to be done that is fine…but to put it honestly even after beta testing a product errors still get through …do I want to change the game totally no…I love the game or else I would not spend my money it.
Hear you Vanya, and I agree on many counts. But what one thinks is common sense, many others do not. Then there are others who don’t care about That issue but think something else is just stupid that you actually like. Then there are those who’ll yell and scream no matter what the change, even if it’s a debate over the Font’s on the pdf.
Christian should have voted “whole new level of complexity”. Nobody said “replace”. But as has been pointed out, the poll is flawed not only because it was poorly written (hindsight 20/20, et al…) but because all polls are flawed… Gee, I’m glad I don’t own the game…
As long as it is understood that I believe the present game should be preserved as is with the exception of fixing any legitimate program errors, e.g. Ruingurth.
Of course there will probably be errors. By errors do you mean bugs that need fixing–that’s not a big deal is it? Or do you mean minor design flaws? if they are genuine flaws–i.e we intended for this and we got this instead–and not creative choices then you just fix them in edition 2.1 right?
As for realism, I think it is a good thing because realism adds to believability though is not essential to playability . (But magic isn’t realistic! Ahhh, but believable magic seems like it could be real. Suspension of disbelief requires a pretense of realism.) As for logical self-consisitencey–yes, I agree, that is essential to a good game.
