Things I dont like about MEPBM (there arent many)

mepbmlist
#1

Clint

2 requests:

1) Can we please have 2 types of 1650 games: - 'communicator' games
where everyone agrees (albeit symbolically) that they are ready to
engage in a bit of dialog (in language X) with their immediate
neighbours - and 'hands off' games, where everyone can do what they
like

It is completely frustrating playing a neutral in a game when none of
your closest neighbours will contact you or respond to diplos! I am
pretty close to dropping such a game on t2 - there just doesnt seem
to be any point. Chris Littlejohn in G52 I'm sure would have a
similar opinion.

As a European I like having a cosmopolitan mix of players in a game,
but they must be willing to all communicate in English (or Spanish or
German) - it is no good playing Rhudaur and then finding out that you
cant communicate with WK or Arth or Card (nor is it much good for Wk,
Arth or Card)

2) I have recently come across a game (52) in which Harlequin has
given a dropout position to someone - despite the fact that the
position was previously dead, and reported as such to other nations.
THis is wrong wrong wrong. Please stop this practise. Once a
position is bankrupt, or capital-less, or whatever, it should be gone
for ever.

Cheers

Mike

#2

2) I have recently come across a game (52) in which Harlequin has
given a dropout position to someone - despite the fact that the
position was previously dead, and reported as such to other

nations.

THis is wrong wrong wrong. Please stop this practise. Once a
position is bankrupt, or capital-less, or whatever, it should be

gone

for ever.

I guess only Harlequin can answer this with certainty.
But I firmly believe that this would never happen. I think it's a
case of how the "frontsheet" is defined. Apparently "inactive"
doesn't always have to mean the nation is dead.
Once the nation is definately out, I'm confident it stays that way.

Johan

#3

1) Can we please have 2 types of 1650 games: - 'communicator' games

Hard to arrange - Grudge games are fine. So for example in game 39 (all
individuals) I get around 40 emails a week. Other games I would never even
hear off the rest of the team.

It is completely frustrating playing a neutral in a game when none of
your closest neighbours will contact you or respond to diplos! I am
pretty close to dropping such a game on t2 - there just doesnt seem
to be any point. Chris Littlejohn in G52 I'm sure would have a
similar opinion.

People generally play Neutrals to play individually is the usual trend. If
players want to diplome then i would generally suggest players join a team.

As a European I like having a cosmopolitan mix of players in a game,
but they must be willing to all communicate in English (or Spanish or
German) - it is no good playing Rhudaur and then finding out that you
cant communicate with WK or Arth or Card (nor is it much good for Wk,
Arth or Card)

Sorry don't understand this. Do you mean willing to communicate?

2) I have recently come across a game (52) in which Harlequin has
given a dropout position to someone - despite the fact that the
position was previously dead, and reported as such to other nations.
THis is wrong wrong wrong. Please stop this practise. Once a
position is bankrupt, or capital-less, or whatever, it should be gone
for ever.

We don't reactivate dead nations. We do allow players to takeover nations
that are standby. We have recently changed things so that we no longer POP
(put out of play - better than POOP which DGE used) nations that are viable.
If you know that this nation was without a capital, bankrupt, no characters
then please inform me.

I covered this in an earlier discussion in more detail.

Clint

#4

--- In mepbmlist@y..., mbarber999@y... wrote:

It is completely frustrating playing a neutral in a game when none

of

your closest neighbours will contact you or respond to diplos! I am
pretty close to dropping such a game on t2 - there just doesnt seem
to be any point. Chris Littlejohn in G52 I'm sure would have a
similar opinion.

On the flip side there is game 61 where the Harad, Corsairs
and Easterlings have not responded almost whatsoever to
overtures by the Dark Servants.

Jeremy

#5

Replies in caps

--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Middle Earth PBM Games" <me@M...> wrote:

> 1) Can we please have 2 types of 1650 games: - 'communicator'

games

Hard to arrange - Grudge games are fine.

WHY IS IT HARD TO ARRANGE? YOU MIGHT FIND THE EXTRA EFFORT WORTH IT
IF IT RESULTS IN LESS DROPOUTS

People generally play Neutrals to play individually is the usual

trend. If > players want to diplome then i would generally suggest
players join a team.

TISH AND TOSH. NEUTRALS WANT TO BE COURTED, TO BE INVOLVED. YOU
HAVE GOT THIS BADLY WRONG

> As a European I like having a cosmopolitan mix of players in a

game,> > but they must be willing to all communicate in English (or
Spanish or > > German) - it is no good playing Rhudaur and then
finding out that you > > cant communicate with WK or Arth or Card
(nor is it much good for Wk,> > Arth or Card)

Sorry don't understand this. Do you mean willing to communicate?

NO, I MEAN CANT COMMUNICATE COS NOT EVERYONE IS WILLING TO WRITE IN
ENGLISH (2 of my neighbours in G63 affected by this)

>
> 2) I have recently come across a game (52) in which Harlequin has
> given a dropout position to someone - despite the fact that the
> position was previously dead, and reported as such to other

nations.

> THis is wrong wrong wrong. Please stop this practise. Once a
> position is bankrupt, or capital-less, or whatever, it should be

gone

> for ever.

We don't reactivate dead nations. We do allow players to takeover

nations

that are standby. We have recently changed things so that we no

longer POP

(put out of play - better than POOP which DGE used) nations that

are viable.

If you know that this nation was without a capital, bankrupt, no

characters then please inform me.

CHECK OUT DUNLENDINGS GAME 52. STRONGLY SUSPECT THAT HE WENT
BANKRUPT AS ALL NON FORTIFIED POPS DEGRADED. ALSO, IF WE GET MESSAGE
THAT X is COLLAPSED AND INACTIVE, THEN WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BELIEVE IT

#6

WHY IS IT HARD TO ARRANGE? YOU MIGHT FIND THE EXTRA EFFORT WORTH IT
IF IT RESULTS IN LESS DROPOUTS

We don't get many drop outs - for example we have ONLY two FA nations
available for standby out 71 games that ain't bad. How can you define a
"communicator" compared with someone who wants to play solo? I would define
myself, for example, as a diplomer but work means that I have less time that
I would like to give to the games so am I now a solo?

It's hard enougth to get games going as it is sometimes so having the
proviso of must communicate would slow games down in creation, which would
mean more drop outs (players waiting too long) and hence a worse game. So a
1wk communicating team game for example I would guess take about a year to
fill. Make it 2950 and you have no chance. Any variant of the the standard
game takes proporionally longer to fill.

> People generally play Neutrals to play individually is the usual
trend. If > players want to diplome then i would generally suggest
players join a team.

TISH AND TOSH. NEUTRALS WANT TO BE COURTED, TO BE INVOLVED. YOU
HAVE GOT THIS BADLY WRONG

Some do, some want to just play off on their own building up and not
particularly interact at all. 20 combined years of GM experience mean that
I don't think we "HAVE GOT THIS BADLY WRONG". :slight_smile: Mistaken possibly.

> Sorry don't understand this. Do you mean willing to communicate?

NO, I MEAN CANT COMMUNICATE COS NOT EVERYONE IS WILLING TO WRITE IN
ENGLISH (2 of my neighbours in G63 affected by this)

Are they? Sorry I was not aware of that - there is no proviso in the rules
about players having to use English - I would imagine that they are at a
disadvantage though. Some players language is difficult to understand or
hard to read. :slight_smile:

> If you know that this nation was without a capital, bankrupt, no
characters then please inform me.

CHECK OUT DUNLENDINGS GAME 52. STRONGLY SUSPECT THAT HE WENT
BANKRUPT AS ALL NON FORTIFIED POPS DEGRADED. ALSO, IF WE GET MESSAGE
THAT X is COLLAPSED AND INACTIVE, THEN WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BELIEVE IT

Yes I have gone into what we do before. What information, turn number etc
have you got so that we can check into this? I have investigated such
claims before and so far found none which fit the criteria. I am not saying
that there aren't any, but what we do when a player takes up a position in
print it out - look for Tax, Character, Capital and if any are missing the
position is not sent out. I will check this out though.

As for inactive nations we do allow players to take up nations if they have
been dropped. Players seem to like it and it makes for a better game it
appears. Having an ally not start in the game - mostly new players drop out
before the game even begins can destroy games - so allowing players to take
up positions is good here. Whether or not that is a good thing throughout
the game's lifetime upto the end turn is something possibly worth dicussing.

Thanks for your input.

Clint

#7

Replies in caps
WHY IS IT HARD TO ARRANGE? YOU MIGHT FIND THE EXTRA EFFORT WORTH IT
IF IT RESULTS IN LESS DROPOUTS

Using caps in e-mails is considered shouting, and is in basic
netiquette often considered rude behaviour. Just thought I'd warn
you, because you probably didn't mean it that way. It easily gives an
angry or aggressive impression, and we wouldn't want that in our cosy
little list now, do we? :wink: Of course, caps are great when you really
are furious over something.

Regards,
Pontus Gustavsson

#8

--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Middle Earth PBM Games" <me@M...> wrote:

> WHY IS IT HARD TO ARRANGE? YOU MIGHT FIND THE EXTRA EFFORT WORTH

IT

> IF IT RESULTS IN LESS DROPOUTS

We don't get many drop outs - for example we have ONLY two FA

nations

available for standby out 71 games that ain't bad. How can you

define a

"communicator" compared with someone who wants to play solo?

Well, the original request here was not for FA but 1650.
Here's the snippet of the original request:
1) Can we please have 2 types of 1650 games: - 'communicator'
games where everyone agrees (albeit symbolically) that they
are ready to engage in a bit of dialog (in language X) with
their immediate neighbours - and 'hands off' games, where
everyone can do what they like...

I will say that I think it is perfectly reasonable for
a neutral to want 5-10 turns to decide which side to
join. Some players find it easier to accomplish this
time by being silent so they aren't continually
getting pleas and offers by one or both sides.)

What really frosts my tail is when -aligned- player (or
an aligned team) wants to play their own game, with
minimual or desultory communications with the rest
of their team. As so many 1650 veterans have agreed
over and over, the game tends to go to the team with
the best teamwork.

There are several factors in 1650 where you can win or
lose a game, sometimes within 5 turns, for reasons having
nothing to do with your abilities or level of contribution.
I've won and lost plenty of games this ways and it feels
lousy, like watching your team from the sidelines. I didn't
feel I got my money's worth. They include:
1. Drops of several nations or one key nation [Eothraim]
from your side or other side.
2. One side has great communicators, the other are clumps
that work poorly with each other or not at all
3. Clumping of neutrals (4:1 or 5:0) This third one is
even more likely to happen due to #1 and #2 above.

In my experience, players who are really value
teamwork and communicating are also less likely
to drop, so #2 and #1 can be related. So a game
that was guaranteed to be full of players who
valued communication and close teamwork, is
a game that is more likely to go the distance
and be really exciting to everyone.

By the same token, for players who want to
fly solo or in clumps, they will get a fairer
and more exciting game if they are pitted
against like opponents.

I do understand Clint's point that if you take
the pool of players who like 1650 and split them
into two pools, then each sub-type of game will
take longer to form, having a smaller pool of
players to draw on. I've always felt that about
one out of four 1650 games was really evenly matched
with plenty of excitement when two teams go at it
Personally, I'd rather wait a lot of extra time
if it meant that the ration improved so that (say)
half the games turned out to be worth the wait,
instead of a quarter.