Keith
2nd February 2008, 12:12 PM
Well, at this point Clint has made it clear that 41 at least is
continuing.
So, it's time for all you bug supporters to join Frank and put _your_
time and money where your mouth is.
Or are you all just bags of hot air?
Saddle up, boys! Bring it on! ;)
Keith
--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@h...>
wrote:
> Well, what a disappointment. Don't want to play do they? Even when it
> would be in their ballpark, with their rules, with an opponent using a
> crippled nation? There is much that could be said about that but I
will
> refrain.
>
>
> >From: "kingoftherill" <kingoftherill@y...>
> >Reply-To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> >To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> >Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: 2-1 Let the game end
> >Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:52:48 -0000
> >
> >--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@h...>
> >wrote:
> > > Clint:
> > > Well if Brad is going to join the beleaugred Frank I will also.
> >Give Brad
> > > the most viable of the drops and I will take the next most viable.
> > > Gavin---come on down. Lets make these guys earn their payments to
> >Harley.
> > > 109364
> >
> >Well Ovatha, Mr Mason declines. It seems that he is only interested
> >in the moderator settling the game for him. I guess we will just have
> >to buzz off:-) I do hope that Clint lets Frank fight on if he wishes
> >and Frank I wish you success, make them earn it if you get the
> >chance.
> >
> >Brad
> > >
> > > >From: "kingoftherill" <kingoftherill@y...>
> > > >Reply-To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> > > >To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> > > >Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: 2-1 Let the game end
> > > >Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:32:48 -0000
> > > >
> > > >--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "corsairs game 101"
> > > ><corsairs101@h...> wrote:
> > > > > >Egads what a gab fest over a subject that has been beaten to
> >death
> > > > > >several times before on both the old forum page and GSI's
> >message
> > > > > >board.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please forgive. I've not been involved in this conversation
> > > >before. It is
> > > > > new to me. People come in and out of the game all the time.
> >What
> > > >is an
> > > > > "old topic" to some, may be new to others.
> > > > >
> > > > > >Darrell if he's the only one left you guys must have almost as
> > > > > >many characters in each and every category as he has total
> > > > > >characters, seems like coordinated use would finish the game
> > > >quickly.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is a 12v12 special rules, modified grudge game. No kidnap or
> > > >assassinate
> > > > > allowed. We're going to have to track down this bug with
> >armies,
> > > >and with
> > > > > 11 of his teammates out, he'll have lots of places to InfOthr
> >away
> > > >to hide
> > > > > in the hills.
> > > > >
> > > > > Either all 12 of us stay in to get good map coverage to chace
> >him
> > > >down
> > > > > wherever he hides, or a few of us could spend dozens of turns
> > > >chasing the
> > > > > bug from one area to another. All to end a game that was
> >a "done
> > > >deal"
> > > > > after GT10.
> > > > >
> > > > > >How many major towns can you see but not account for the
> >owners?
> > > > >
> > > > > No idea how many MTs might be out there. In 4th age, with
> >starting
> > > >60
> > > > > emissaries out the A..... We saw no offensive use of
> >emissaries,
> > > >so those
> > > > > emissaries may have been very busy creating pops for this guy to
> > > >pick up off
> > > > > droped nations.
> > > >
> > > >So are you saying your team has retired his emissaries becaus
> > > >you "saw no offensive use of emissaries"? If not I don't get your
> > > >point. You have map coverage with all 12 of your team active
> >right?
> > > >In 4th age don't your turn reports tell you which major towns you
> > > >own? If so someone on your team should be able to mark off the
> >major
> > > >towns you know you have, and you can send those useless agents to
> >the
> > > >unknown towns to find out who owns them. If it is his you have an
> > > >objective to march on, if not it is inactive so steal from it and
> > > >move on or send an agent there accompanied by a challenge character
> > > >to scout and then challenge any of his characters that come by.
> >Send
> > > >your better agents to his pops to steal and sabotage stores. If he
> >is
> > > >not playing dead he must have armies in the field that he has to
> >pay
> > > >maintenance for if you steal his gold and sabotage massive amounts
> >of
> > > >his production materials he cannot sell to cover his deficit if he
> > > >has one. The result is his taxes go up and loyalty degrades making
> >it
> > > >easier for you to threaten. Use LAT and Reveal Character True to
> > > >locate his characters then send your challenge gods after them.
> > > >Surely you have at least one good challenge character per nation.
> >How
> > > >many can he possibly have? I've been a bug, not for long but two
> >of
> > > >us in a past 1650 game fought on for 6 turns after our allies had
> > > >been put down. We weren't just bugs, we took population centers,
> > > >raided with our fleets, fought the character war etc. Our opponents
> > > >simply began to track us down methodically and killed our
> >economies,
> > > >when my only surviving ally was eliminated and I was down to 7
> > > >characters at that point I capitulated. I learned valuable lessons
> >in
> > > >that one sided fight and have spoken with a couple of my opponents
> > > >who said the same. Granted it was a 1650 game and they could
> > > >assassinate, kidnap, curse, influence, and challenge us which they
> > > >did. You seem hamstrung by the conditions you explain.
> > > >
> > > >Hell Clint I can solve this for you right now. I will join the bug
> > > >swarm and make it 2 against 12 for as long as we can hang on. Maybe
> > > >there are others also then at least the victors can fight less long
> > > >odds. C'mon guys you ought to be able to take him out don't try and
> > > >make Clint do it for you, and end this thread.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >I totally disagree with whoever posted the make players pay up
> > > >front
> > > > > >for a minimum number of turns no refunds thought. I think that
> > > >would
> > > > > >drive many players from the game. I haven't heard much on the
> > > >rating
> > > > > >system, but it was my understanding that this was more a tool
> >to
> > > >help
> > > > > >Clint set up more competitive games among players with
> > > >approximately
> > > > > >the same skills.
> > > > >
> > > > > NO!!!!! if that is all it was to be used for, then he could
> >just
> > > >keep a
> > > > > list of how many games you've been in and how many you've won.
> > > > >
> > > > > The monster that is to be the player ranking system will create
> >a
> > > >list of
> > > > > "best players" that will be shoved in everyone faces on a
> >monthly
> > > >mailing
> > > > > and on the web site. Unfortunatly, these "best players" will be
> > > >bugs that
> > > > > hid for a dozen turns until the opposition got frustrated and
> >went
> > > >looking
> > > > > for an enjoyable game.
> > > > >
> > > > > Player rankings is the absolute WORST thing that could happen to
> > > >MEPBM.
> > > > >
> > > > > Darrell Shimel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >I do think however that there is probably a way to
> > > > > >track those who continually drop early in the game for no
> >apparent
> > > > > >reason, or at the first experience of a reversal they give up.
> >In
> > > > > >those cases I believe Clint could point out to them how
> >disruptive
> > > >to
> > > > > >their team mates that behavior is and warn that player he will
> >be
> > > >in
> > > > > >a probationary status for, say his next two games, and if he
> > > > > >continues his past drop propensity he will suffer a ban of say
> >6
> > > > > >months, before being accepted into a new game. That might make
> > > >throw
> > > > > >away games less common among this type of players.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
continuing.
So, it's time for all you bug supporters to join Frank and put _your_
time and money where your mouth is.
Or are you all just bags of hot air?
Saddle up, boys! Bring it on! ;)
Keith
--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@h...>
wrote:
> Well, what a disappointment. Don't want to play do they? Even when it
> would be in their ballpark, with their rules, with an opponent using a
> crippled nation? There is much that could be said about that but I
will
> refrain.
>
>
> >From: "kingoftherill" <kingoftherill@y...>
> >Reply-To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> >To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> >Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: 2-1 Let the game end
> >Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 02:52:48 -0000
> >
> >--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@h...>
> >wrote:
> > > Clint:
> > > Well if Brad is going to join the beleaugred Frank I will also.
> >Give Brad
> > > the most viable of the drops and I will take the next most viable.
> > > Gavin---come on down. Lets make these guys earn their payments to
> >Harley.
> > > 109364
> >
> >Well Ovatha, Mr Mason declines. It seems that he is only interested
> >in the moderator settling the game for him. I guess we will just have
> >to buzz off:-) I do hope that Clint lets Frank fight on if he wishes
> >and Frank I wish you success, make them earn it if you get the
> >chance.
> >
> >Brad
> > >
> > > >From: "kingoftherill" <kingoftherill@y...>
> > > >Reply-To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> > > >To: mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com
> > > >Subject: [mepbmlist] Re: 2-1 Let the game end
> > > >Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:32:48 -0000
> > > >
> > > >--- In mepbmlist (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "corsairs game 101"
> > > ><corsairs101@h...> wrote:
> > > > > >Egads what a gab fest over a subject that has been beaten to
> >death
> > > > > >several times before on both the old forum page and GSI's
> >message
> > > > > >board.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please forgive. I've not been involved in this conversation
> > > >before. It is
> > > > > new to me. People come in and out of the game all the time.
> >What
> > > >is an
> > > > > "old topic" to some, may be new to others.
> > > > >
> > > > > >Darrell if he's the only one left you guys must have almost as
> > > > > >many characters in each and every category as he has total
> > > > > >characters, seems like coordinated use would finish the game
> > > >quickly.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is a 12v12 special rules, modified grudge game. No kidnap or
> > > >assassinate
> > > > > allowed. We're going to have to track down this bug with
> >armies,
> > > >and with
> > > > > 11 of his teammates out, he'll have lots of places to InfOthr
> >away
> > > >to hide
> > > > > in the hills.
> > > > >
> > > > > Either all 12 of us stay in to get good map coverage to chace
> >him
> > > >down
> > > > > wherever he hides, or a few of us could spend dozens of turns
> > > >chasing the
> > > > > bug from one area to another. All to end a game that was
> >a "done
> > > >deal"
> > > > > after GT10.
> > > > >
> > > > > >How many major towns can you see but not account for the
> >owners?
> > > > >
> > > > > No idea how many MTs might be out there. In 4th age, with
> >starting
> > > >60
> > > > > emissaries out the A..... We saw no offensive use of
> >emissaries,
> > > >so those
> > > > > emissaries may have been very busy creating pops for this guy to
> > > >pick up off
> > > > > droped nations.
> > > >
> > > >So are you saying your team has retired his emissaries becaus
> > > >you "saw no offensive use of emissaries"? If not I don't get your
> > > >point. You have map coverage with all 12 of your team active
> >right?
> > > >In 4th age don't your turn reports tell you which major towns you
> > > >own? If so someone on your team should be able to mark off the
> >major
> > > >towns you know you have, and you can send those useless agents to
> >the
> > > >unknown towns to find out who owns them. If it is his you have an
> > > >objective to march on, if not it is inactive so steal from it and
> > > >move on or send an agent there accompanied by a challenge character
> > > >to scout and then challenge any of his characters that come by.
> >Send
> > > >your better agents to his pops to steal and sabotage stores. If he
> >is
> > > >not playing dead he must have armies in the field that he has to
> >pay
> > > >maintenance for if you steal his gold and sabotage massive amounts
> >of
> > > >his production materials he cannot sell to cover his deficit if he
> > > >has one. The result is his taxes go up and loyalty degrades making
> >it
> > > >easier for you to threaten. Use LAT and Reveal Character True to
> > > >locate his characters then send your challenge gods after them.
> > > >Surely you have at least one good challenge character per nation.
> >How
> > > >many can he possibly have? I've been a bug, not for long but two
> >of
> > > >us in a past 1650 game fought on for 6 turns after our allies had
> > > >been put down. We weren't just bugs, we took population centers,
> > > >raided with our fleets, fought the character war etc. Our opponents
> > > >simply began to track us down methodically and killed our
> >economies,
> > > >when my only surviving ally was eliminated and I was down to 7
> > > >characters at that point I capitulated. I learned valuable lessons
> >in
> > > >that one sided fight and have spoken with a couple of my opponents
> > > >who said the same. Granted it was a 1650 game and they could
> > > >assassinate, kidnap, curse, influence, and challenge us which they
> > > >did. You seem hamstrung by the conditions you explain.
> > > >
> > > >Hell Clint I can solve this for you right now. I will join the bug
> > > >swarm and make it 2 against 12 for as long as we can hang on. Maybe
> > > >there are others also then at least the victors can fight less long
> > > >odds. C'mon guys you ought to be able to take him out don't try and
> > > >make Clint do it for you, and end this thread.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >I totally disagree with whoever posted the make players pay up
> > > >front
> > > > > >for a minimum number of turns no refunds thought. I think that
> > > >would
> > > > > >drive many players from the game. I haven't heard much on the
> > > >rating
> > > > > >system, but it was my understanding that this was more a tool
> >to
> > > >help
> > > > > >Clint set up more competitive games among players with
> > > >approximately
> > > > > >the same skills.
> > > > >
> > > > > NO!!!!! if that is all it was to be used for, then he could
> >just
> > > >keep a
> > > > > list of how many games you've been in and how many you've won.
> > > > >
> > > > > The monster that is to be the player ranking system will create
> >a
> > > >list of
> > > > > "best players" that will be shoved in everyone faces on a
> >monthly
> > > >mailing
> > > > > and on the web site. Unfortunatly, these "best players" will be
> > > >bugs that
> > > > > hid for a dozen turns until the opposition got frustrated and
> >went
> > > >looking
> > > > > for an enjoyable game.
> > > > >
> > > > > Player rankings is the absolute WORST thing that could happen to
> > > >MEPBM.
> > > > >
> > > > > Darrell Shimel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >I do think however that there is probably a way to
> > > > > >track those who continually drop early in the game for no
> >apparent
> > > > > >reason, or at the first experience of a reversal they give up.
> >In
> > > > > >those cases I believe Clint could point out to them how
> >disruptive
> > > >to
> > > > > >their team mates that behavior is and warn that player he will
> >be
> > > >in
> > > > > >a probationary status for, say his next two games, and if he
> > > > > >continues his past drop propensity he will suffer a ban of say
> >6
> > > > > >months, before being accepted into a new game. That might make
> > > >throw
> > > > > >away games less common among this type of players.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >