The Random Victory Conditions

From: Darrell Shimel <threeedgedsword35@yahoo.com>

> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:29:27 -0800 (PST)
> [...]
> What erosion of the fog of war? I've not seen them provide
> players any information that the player couldn't get by
> reading all their teammates' pdfs.

Really? Where do you go to get the answers to your MEPBM riddles when
you can't figure them out for yourself?

> Email and Yahoo groups eroded the fog of war, not ME Games.

You forgot web pages. But I agree with your assertion here in most
ways; the fog of war regarding Dragons, Riddles, Seasons, Production,
Market Influences, and so on were all eroding before ME Games
consolidated all those erodants into a one-stop-shopping erodant
store.

However, the fog of not knowing who in the Real World [TM] was playing
what Nation was eroded by places like Harlequin and ME Games, as I
understand it.

> Yes, Palantir presents the information in a more user
> friendly way, but it doesn't provide ANY extra information.

Such support tools were inevitable. I was going to write one to
supplant Palantir + MEOW + Turn Checker but ME Games is already
working on it, so I've turned my software engineering skills to
another project.

> > TWO: The constraining of an amoral Real Politik into an
> > English 'spirit of the game".
>
> Most people I know HATED, HATED, HATED what you call the
> "Real Politik". I think this is what spawned the team and
> grudge game formats, which happend LONG before Harlie took
> over from GSI.

And you are, apparently, in the very great majority on this point.

> I know I hated that aspect of the game. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE
> that Harlie doesn't reward individual game winners.

You realize you are arguing directly into Ed's previous statements on
this matter, right?

What makes that 'Real Politik' aspect of the game manifest is
precisely what you hate; the unknowns about your neighbors, the
uncertainty about loyalties and motives.

Ed loves that aspect of a game. He's apparently a rare breed.
You hate that aspect of a game. You're in the majority.

Ed is, if I may be so bold as to paraphrase his previous arguments on
the matter, of the opinion that this element of the game constitutes
artistic genius, and in his opinion those who don't like this are, at
least in this regard, a bit simpler people than those who do like it.

That last bit is a touch arrogant, but surely we all have our moments
where arrogance guides us a bit more than perhaps we'd like. It is
natural, albeit potentially unwise and unhealthy, to see people with
lesser skills in an area where we excel as...I hate to use the phrase,
but it's true...lesser beings. Only in that context, usually, but it
is a natural emotive conclusion most people draw under those
circumstances.

As I see it, Ed's just a little bit more gruff in his presentation of
that opinion than others would tend to be. Hardly a killing crime.

> I love that this aspect has been removed so much, that I just
> about got myself banned from the game by fighting AGAINST the
> PRS that returned these STUPID, much harted personal victory
> points to ANY kind of importance at all.

What or who is/are/were "the PRS"?

> The aspect that has been removed, was an aspect I HATED!!!!!!

Yes, and there still appears to be some emotional energy attached to
that reaction. :slight_smile:

> > THREE: Simplifications that amount to a "dumbing down" of
> > the game.
>
> What dumbing down??? Give one example of a simplification
> that dumbed down the game.

Ed has presented an argument at least once, which I paraphrased and
summarized terribly above, enumerating at least one aspect of the game
which he considers to be "dumbed down". It's that the game as it is
generally played today eliminates a lot of variable conditions that,
in his opinion, required a lot of skill to play when they were still
present. Such as knowing who in Real Life [TM] your neighbors were,
and thus permitting out-of-band communication with them.

See, if you had no way of identifying your teammates (never mind that
in this day and age that's very nearly impossible to enforce, but *if*
it were), then you couldn't share your PDFs and XMLs with them.

You could send Diplomatic Missives via ME Games, and you could outline
all sorts of information, but just "*plop* here's the whole team's
view" would not be possible. THERE WOULD BE MORE VARIABLES. A
teammate might have a less-than-perfect agenda in order to win
personally. And balancing between team goals and personal goals
becomes something everyone has to do.

In Ed's opinion (again, summarizing and paraphrasing, and thus risking
a lack of perfect accuracy), these things required skills which are
not needed when you have perfect communication on the teams. Surely
you cannot argue against this one detail.

So take the next step: Ed feels that removing the need for these
skills in the game is a "dumbing down" of the game.

You don't have to agree. But *surely* you can see where he's coming
from.

> If you consider a "user friendly interface" to be dumbing
> down, then we'll NEVER see eye-to-eye on this point. I love
> the user friendly interface that is Palantir.... It needs a
> lot of work, but is much better than trying to keep a
> full-sized map up to date with lots of little stick pins and
> stickers.

I concur. In my survey response, I took every opportunity to point
out that the one thing MEPBM was missing today was a killer client
application program. Regardless of whether it is used in a team mode
or in an individual mode, MEPBM needs to get out of 1985 and 1990
technology and "modern up" in order to grow. It needs a killer client
app, one which can load up all XMLs, track all changes (including
bridges added or removed from the turn map), enter orders (especially
movement orders!) DIRECTLY throught he GUI, rebuke the player for
attempting to perform illegal operations, and so on. The modern day
multiplayer online game player wants, needs, expects this. If MEPBM
is going to grow, it needs to grow up.

That is, I suspect, largely separate from what Ed references when he
somewhat derragatorily mentions the "dumbing down" of the game. But
it is of course possible that this is an equal attribute of dumbness
in his opinion. I can't speak for Ed. I'm just trying to translate
some of his arguments into different words, ones to which you might be
able to more understandingly relate.

I hope I've succeeded.

Frankly, I'd like to see a game set up where great efforts were made
to keep the players ignorant of each others' identities, and where
automatic sharing of information was made so difficult as to be not
worth the effort, and where individual victory conditions could be
tangentially a motive in each player's activities, and where those
individual victories mattered.

But I acknowledge that it would be a rare event, because most people
don't like Diplomacy that much and would work hard enough to get
around whatever roadblocks were put in place to prevent it.

The fact is, the team games suit more gamers' desires; even when
they're not playing in the grudge game team format, apparently.

So be it.

···

_________________
Steven K. Mariner
skmyg@bhmk.com
http://home.earthlink.net/~marinersk/
http://www.whirlyjigmusic.com/

Judging by what I have seen from Harley in the past, all you would need to do is simply bring it up with them that you want such a game, provide as many names as possible, and the work would begin to bring such a game into being...no sharing of pdfs, only contacting through specified channels, whatever. But the one thing that Harley has done has provided the options to do these forms of specialized games.

The question is, do you have enough people to do so, and do you (in the nebulous "royal" sense) have the desire to put for the extra effort to help gather a game together. The answer to that, apparently to this point, has been no.

You can never take away the information that has been shared (riddles, starting positions, etc) however, that information has only been available for about, what, 8+ years that I know about, including the time of GSI...obviously the riddle list has increased some since then. The core of what you are talking about, personal motives, shiftiness of communication, you can still generate this effect. If YOU choose to do so. I don't see Harley stopping you. Of course, the humorous part would be the very shiftiness you are looking for may cause you to question whether or not those persons are sticking to the rules as laid out, but...:slight_smile:

-Ken

···

Frankly, I'd like to see a game set up where great efforts were made
to keep the players ignorant of each others' identities, and where
automatic sharing of information was made so difficult as to be not
worth the effort, and where individual victory conditions could be
tangentially a motive in each player's activities, and where those
individual victories mattered.

But I acknowledge that it would be a rare event, because most people
don't like Diplomacy that much and would work hard enough to get
around whatever roadblocks were put in place to prevent it.

The fact is, the team games suit more gamers' desires; even when
they're not playing in the grudge game team format, apparently.

So be it.

_________________
Steven K. Mariner
skmyg@bhmk.com
http://home.earthlink.net/~marinersk/
http://www.whirlyjigmusic.com/

> From: Darrell Shimel
<threeedgedsword35@yahoo.com>
> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:29:27 -0800 (PST)
> [...]
> What erosion of the fog of war? I've not seen
them provide
> players any information that the player couldn't
get by
> reading all their teammates' pdfs.

Really? Where do you go to get the answers to your
MEPBM riddles when
you can't figure them out for yourself?

There were any number of sources available. Players,
not the company, put these lists together.... All the
company did was put this player gathered information
into an easy to find location so that all players
would have equal access.

> Email and Yahoo groups eroded the fog of war, not
ME Games.

You forgot web pages. But I agree with your
assertion here in most
ways; the fog of war regarding Dragons, Riddles,
Seasons, Production,
Market Influences, and so on were all eroding before
ME Games
consolidated all those erodants into a
one-stop-shopping erodant
store.

However, the fog of not knowing who in the Real
World [TM] was playing
what Nation was eroded by places like Harlequin and
ME Games, as I
understand it.

What? We used to send each other little contact cards
all the time. I don't see the difference between a
contact card and the front sheet, except that once
again, the front sheet makes it easier.

> > TWO: The constraining of an amoral Real
Politik into an
> > English 'spirit of the game".
>
> Most people I know HATED, HATED, HATED what you
call the
> "Real Politik". I think this is what spawned the
team and
> grudge game formats, which happend LONG before
Harlie took
> over from GSI.

And you are, apparently, in the very great majority
on this point.

> I know I hated that aspect of the game. I LOVE,
LOVE, LOVE
> that Harlie doesn't reward individual game
winners.

You realize you are arguing directly into Ed's
previous statements on
this matter, right?

Yep..... I'm not arguing that his logic is flawed.
Removal of the importance of Victory Points and
Victory Conditions has indeed changed the game. Ed
and I agree on that point.

I'm disagreeing with the value of these aspects of the
game.

He seems to like infighting and backstabbing.... I
mean, running your nation with one eye to team goals
and one eye to nation goals.....

I prefer a game where EVERYONE keeps both eyes on the
team goal and utterly ignores the personal aspect.

Ed is, if I may be so bold as to paraphrase his
previous arguments on
the matter, of the opinion that this element of the
game constitutes
artistic genius, and in his opinion those who don't
like this are, at
least in this regard, a bit simpler people than
those who do like it.

Then I guess I'm just dumb.... To me, it takes 10
minutes to figure out a set of orders for my nation.
Not a big deal.

It is the communication and coordination aspects that
take the real talent. These are the aspects I most
enjoy. These are the aspects that are ruined when each
nation is looking out for themselves.

That last bit is a touch arrogant, but surely we all
have our moments
where arrogance guides us a bit more than perhaps
we'd like.

Who me.... never.

It is
natural, albeit potentially unwise and unhealthy, to
see people with
lesser skills in an area where we excel as...I hate
to use the phrase,
but it's true...lesser beings. Only in that
context, usually, but it
is a natural emotive conclusion most people draw
under those
circumstances.

We have the same data. I'm logical. I've reached
this conclusion. If you've reached a different
conclusion, either you're not logical or just don't
understand the data.

Unfortunatly, this is not an objective situation where
we're discussion the color of the sky. We're
discussing our personal likes and dislikes. This is a
matter of taste, and two equally logical people, using
the same data, but different value sets, can reach
different conclusions.

I value a team win MUCH more than I value my personal
victory points.

> I love that this aspect has been removed so much,
that I just
> about got myself banned from the game by fighting
AGAINST the
> PRS that returned these STUPID, much harted
personal victory
> points to ANY kind of importance at all.

What or who is/are/were "the PRS"?

Player rating system. http://www.middleearthgames.com
Bottom entry in the left menu.

I'm SO GLAD that most people have totally ignored this
rating system.

> The aspect that has been removed, was an aspect I
HATED!!!!!!

Yes, and there still appears to be some emotional
energy attached to
that reaction. :slight_smile:

MUCH!

> > THREE: Simplifications that amount to a
"dumbing down" of
> > the game.
>
> What dumbing down??? Give one example of a
simplification
> that dumbed down the game.

Ed has presented an argument at least once, which I
paraphrased and
summarized terribly above, enumerating at least one
aspect of the game
which he considers to be "dumbed down". It's that
the game as it is
generally played today eliminates a lot of variable
conditions that,
in his opinion, required a lot of skill to play when
they were still
present. Such as knowing who in Real Life [TM] your
neighbors were,
and thus permitting out-of-band communication with
them.

I atarted playing in the day of email. I've never
played a game where I didn't have instant access to
all my teammates info.

Sure, in the early days we didn't send pdf's back and
forth or post them all to a web site, but we did share
ALL the information in the pdf.... We just wrote it up
by hand, copying it from the pdf to the email status
report.

I still do these for the most part, just because it
forces me to examine my own turn so carefully.

See, if you had no way of identifying your teammates
(never mind that
in this day and age that's very nearly impossible to
enforce, but *if*
it were), then you couldn't share your PDFs and XMLs
with them.

Sure, without real contact, you could backstab an ally
and not have it come back to bite you in a future
game. I prefer to know exaclty who my teammates are,
and that I can 100% trust them to only be focused on
the team goal.

Ed should stick with gun boat games since they seem to
have been created with exactly his prefered style of
play in mind.

In Ed's opinion (again, summarizing and
paraphrasing, and thus risking
a lack of perfect accuracy), these things required
skills which are
not needed when you have perfect communication on
the teams. Surely
you cannot argue against this one detail.

I can argue that I do not like that aspect of the
game.

So take the next step: Ed feels that removing the
need for these
skills in the game is a "dumbing down" of the game.

Then I'm all for dumbing it down.

···

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com

However, the fog of not knowing who in the Real World [TM] was playing
what Nation was eroded by places like Harlequin and ME Games, as I
understand it.

Note you can always have your name and contact details hidden if you
wish. Some players have chosen to do this in games.

See, if you had no way of identifying your teammates (never mind that

in this day and age that's very nearly impossible to enforce, but *if*
it were), then you couldn't share your PDFs and XMLs with them.

But in the GSI days you 'd just contact your team-mates, give out your
email and then contact them. I like planning with team-mates - I think
it's the best part of the game. Working out a plan of action, implementing
it, seeing who on your team is amenable to such a plan and those that
aren't (ie working with the resources available).

I concur. In my survey response, I took every opportunity to point

out that the one thing MEPBM was missing today was a killer client
application program. Regardless of whether it is used in a team mode
or in an individual mode, MEPBM needs to get out of 1985 and 1990
technology and "modern up" in order to grow. It needs a killer client
app, one which can load up all XMLs, track all changes (including
bridges added or removed from the turn map), enter orders (especially
movement orders!) DIRECTLY throught he GUI, rebuke the player for
attempting to perform illegal operations, and so on. The modern day
multiplayer online game player wants, needs, expects this. If MEPBM
is going to grow, it needs to grow up.

Yes that would be ideal. We're working on aspects of this at present.

Clint

···

----------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.823 / Virus Database: 561 - Release Date: 26/12/04

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]