RE: [eia] impasse

["James Helle" <jhelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am not opposed to starting over.  However, if we do this will be the third
time we've done so since I've started playing.  I think we should discuss
(and decide on) a mechanism that will prevent us starting over any more
after this.  I have gotten the impression that some players are not fond of
the UMP rules, but these may have to be our fall back position in the
future.

Also, JJ and I discussed the bidding system a week or two ago and it seems
both of us are wondering if we have been bidding too high to make victory
reasonably attainable.  Kyle, would the EIH people have some input on
"sensible" bids?

BTW, I'm not necessarily making a case for starting over.  I'm just raising
some issues I think we should address if we decide to.

-----Original Message-----
From: eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Joel Uckelman
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:03 PM
To: public list for an Empires in Arms game
Subject: Re: [eia] impasse


Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> Are we planning to keep going in the present game with a new player for
> Austria, or would the group prefer to start over ?  I don't have a strong
> preference either way; I'm just trying to start the discussion.  If we are
> starting over, then it would save Nate the trouble.
>
> -JJY

I've been of the opinion that we should declare Britain the winner and
start over for quite a long time now.

--
J.


_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia

_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia