Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners

From: Kevin McGee <kdmcgee@aol.com>

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000

bonar@math.rutgers.edu (Doug Bonar) wrote:
>
>	It still sounds to me like the neutral country picked a
>strategy, stuck to it, and in the end won the game. You simply sound
>sore because you don't like his strategy.
>
>	If you wish to argue that what he did was against the 'spirit'
>of the game, perhaps you should think of what the citizens of his
>country might feel.  They stayed out of a war, built up a great
>economy, gain a potentially dominant political position in the area
>and don't have to worry about menace from the dark side either.
>To me that sounds like exactly what they would want - especially
>considering that the country was a neutral to begin with.
>
>	One posting in this thread implied that a neutral contry
>can join either the good or evil side without their having any
>say in the matter.  If that is the case, that looks like a problem
>in the rules.  (And incidentally, fixing it would 'fix' the play
>you don't like too.)  But why don't you consider sitting and building
>forces if no-one is attacking a valid strategy?  Would you think
>more highly of it if it was done by one of the free people?  Soeone
>on the dark side?
>
>Doug
>

There is no question that the player in question chose a strategy and
stuck to it.  If one were to read my original posting, I discussed the
early interactions, or lack thereof that my team had with the five
neutrals in the game.  One of the things that most irritated me was the
disingenuous tone of the Corsair's communications.  He said, in effect,
"I'm not playing this one for the record.  I'm just researching the game
mechanics.  I'll probably drop out by turn X."

The thrust of my entire arguement is; What price is worth the win?
Lying?  Well, he wasn't lying, he was practicing good diplomacy.  Bull
doodoo.  Anyone can lie.  Diplomacy takes skill.  Is sitting on the
sidelines of the games for 15 or 20 turns and using a grand total of 15%
of the different order types available to your position the way to win?
Oh, he was practicing a skillfully conceived and executed strategy.
Again, that's crap.  Anyone can do that.  What I am saying is; What's the
point?  I can hide behind lies and not interact with the other 24 players
in the game and win.  Well, congratulations.

Is there a flaw in ME-PBM's system that allows this?  Well, I'm sure GSI
would say no, but I say there is.  I think that there should be an
"Invite Neutral" order that someone on the team must issue before the
neutral can join.  But that really dodges my point.

I've played a lot of PBM games since I started in the late 70's and every
single game that I have played, heard or read about has been flawed to a
greater or lesser degree.  This is because really intelligent people play
these games and they will find the flaws.  Whether it is an economic
imbalance that allows knowledgable players to print money or another flaw
that allows for the creation of invincible units or all-powerful
artifacts.  Every game is flawed and someone will find it.

I just get so tired of the players that live on these flaws.  Okay, so
you figured out that the game rewards inaction and non-participation.
Congratulations, you are a major-league brain and an excellent PBM'er.
Now PLAY the damn game.

To answer your question about whether this inactive behavior is seen from
members of the good, or bad teams.  Yes, the game system rewards it and
some percentage of players practice it.  Many times you can tell by turn
2 or 3 which these will be.  They are the ones that do not contact their
"teammates", or will not disclose their names, etc.  They are universally
reviled.

So is winning the whole point?  Inaction is not competition.

Kevin

References

Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 10 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
dcd@nasa.kodak.com (Dennis DeYoung)
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
bonar@math.rutgers.edu (Doug Bonar)
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Mon, 10 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
dcd@nasa.kodak.com (Dennis DeYoung)
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000
Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
bonar@math.rutgers.edu (Doug Bonar)
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000