Re: Charging for rules

From: lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)

Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:26:10 +0000

Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Hmm, I think myself that more than one example is needed to
> justify the word 'rife'.

Suit yourself.

> And you acknowledge that you're
> speaking of the past by using the phrase 'the classic days'.

For that one example, yes. There are plenty of players of the new one
you can ask; combat operations are brutal unless you have plenty of $$.

> So let's see what we can all agree about? I suggest that it's
> pretty obvious that -
> 1 - No-one deliberately designs a game to be unfair,

I disagree.

> 2 - No-one can run an unfair game successfully for long,

Plenty of proof that this is wrong.

> 3 - PBM/PBeM games can't be forcibly imposed on players: the
> games evolve, dynamically,

Babble.

> 4 - One obvious way to get over the design problem of players
> buying power, is to put a limit to what they can spend per
> turn.

Which I haven't seen in the long-running games that do this.

Then again, when have we ever agreed?

-- greg

References

Re: Charging for rules
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:35:05 +0000

Re: Charging for rules
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:35:05 +0000