Re: MEPBM 2950: looking for setups

From: Patrick F. McGehearty <patrick@convex.COM>

Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 17:58:32 +0000

In article <hM3VQjd.kazandar@delphi.com>,
kazandar  <kazandar@delphi.com> wrote:
>Steve, Steve, Steve.  Trying to take all the mystery away and the first turn
>hasn't even been run.
>
>Tom

Perhaps, but if you are a neutral in a team game, you will be at a
tremendous disadvantage for information.  Each team will have a setup for 10
positions at the minimum, and if even one team member is on another team
game for the other side, then the team will likely have a full setup.  If
you are not a neutral, but believe the other side has full setups, it seems
foolish to not to do the same.  I think GSI is working on changing
some details from game to game, i.e. some initial artifacts the Dundain
Rangers start with are slightly different in power in my position than in
another game.  Same total points, just distributed differently.  Perhaps
these efforts will equalize the situation a bit.

I consider information exchange a part of the diplomacy in the game.
Given the weak starting positions, if two or three well-placed nations
attack a fourth on move 2, it will be crippled or out by move 5 if it does
not get some help from others.  Some Neutral positions really have potential
problems in this regard.

Perhaps if you are in a game of twenty-five where you all agree not to
look outside the game for more info, it could work.  Otherwise, it just
seems like playing with blinders on.

My solution is to start new popcenters and name/train characters.
By turn 10, your position should be significantly different from
the initial setup, so it is no longer a critical issue.

- Patrick McGehearty
  patrick@convex.com

References

MEPBM 2950: looking for setups
stomljen@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (You Better Work!!)
Thu, 29 Sep 1994 23:08:36 +0000
Re: MEPBM 2950: looking for setups
kazandar <kazandar@delphi.com>
Fri, 30 Sep 1994 03:27:17 +0000