What happened to open 12v12/10v10 games without neutrals?

mepbmlist
#1

Don:
Can't help but recall my very first Harley game. Old game 71, in which I was a member of the Free. All five neutrals went DS and I'm dure three of them were prealigned sinced they jumped the FP on turn two. The other two neutrals dropped and these went DS eventually also. However, that game went 33 turns and the FP almost won--dropped the One Ring just as it was reaching Mt. Doom.

It all comes down to how well the team bonds and how tenacious the players are, I guess. Personl investment in the cause.
Ed Mills

···

From: "fpfalls" <donald.palmer@ci.minneapolis.mn.us>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mepbmlist] What happened to open 12v12/10v10 games without neutrals?
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 13:41:01 -0000

Clint,

As any of us who read the MEPBM game forum's know, there is a bunch
of shenanigans going on that does not help the "game" as we know it.
In my two current games, and also my last game (Me 95 which I
dropped), the neutral sitiuation has led to lessened enjoyment and
short games which are then not worth the $7+ US turn fee and set up.
Without going into detail - you can read the threads regarding ME 95,
ME 35, and ME 233 - we have lopsided neutral choices for one side or
the other for various reasons, the other side cries foul and starts
dropping, and the game degenerates. In the case of 233, we have a
neutral (Duns) who is using the game as a forum for him to protest
the new PRS system, and this has caused erratic gameplay as well,
shall we say.

In some thread in the last few months, I recall you responding to
someone when they asked if you would offer an open, no neutral game
for those that did not want to go to the trouble or know enough
players to form a grudge team, and still like to meet new players.
I have seen nothing of this since then.

Would any others like to see such a game ? Those who tire of neutral
doings and undoings, games you've invested time and money in for a
handful of turns degenerating quickly, etc. - does this sound like
something you would sign up for ?

Don Palmer
Rhudaur 35
Ice King 233

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar � get it now! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

#2

I also remember old game 71 but slightly differently. Still, I was the QA
and later took over the Fire King so that's not too surprising.

The original Northern Gondor player was less than diplomatic, which is why
the Neutrals went dark so quickly. I knew none of them before the start of
the game and nothing they said suggested that they knew each other.

I would also dispute that the FP almost won. The Noldo (the only remaining
FP nation against our 14) did pick up the One Ring but the best they were
likely to do was deliver it straight to Sauron. There was something in
excess of 20 characters waiting for them to arrive.

I agree about the teamwork, however. With a couple of notable exceptions we
had a very strong team with a lot of communication in that game. That made
a big difference.

Richard

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@hotmail.com>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 2:23 PM
Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] What happened to open 12v12/10v10 games without
neutrals?

Don:
Can't help but recall my very first Harley game. Old game 71, in which I
was a member of the Free. All five neutrals went DS and I'm dure three of
them were prealigned sinced they jumped the FP on turn two. The other two
neutrals dropped and these went DS eventually also. However, that game

went

33 turns and the FP almost won--dropped the One Ring just as it was

reaching

Mt. Doom.

It all comes down to how well the team bonds and how tenacious the players
are, I guess. Personl investment in the cause.
Ed Mills