Re: [eia] impasse

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    First, I hope you are not counting me on the side of wanting to start a
new game.  I was opposed to restarting last time (when Nate joined the
game), and if we just keep restarting as soon as someone quits the game (for
whatever reason), we'll never get beyond 1807.
    Second, a placing a cap on bidding is not going to work.  Suppose your
cap is 25.  Then you have 5 people who bid 25 for France, let's say.  Then
you have a competitive die roll.  So the lucky person who gets it now has an
easier time of winning the game.  Same goes for Russia.  This is completely
wrong-headed.
    The bidding system is there for a reason, to force people who bid high
to make tough decisions and to force people to "pay" what a country is worth
"on the open market".  If you don't think you can win bidding 40 for France,
but somebody else does, then that person should get France.  In our current
game, Jim thought he could win with France by bidding 47 (or something like
that) and now he is seeing that he was overly optimistic.  In our first
game, I had bid 42, and I learned that was a mistake as well.  But just
because Jim and I couldn't win bidding as high as we did doesn't mean
somebody else out there couldn't do better than we did.  If someone else
thinks that Jim and I played France all wrong, then they should bid higher
than we are prepared to.
    You shouldn't have to *force* people to make reasonable bids.  Either
they will make reasonable bids, or they will lose.  It's that simple.

kdh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Helle" <jhelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 10:48 AM
Subject: RE: [eia] impasse


> One way would be to put a cap on the bidding process.  I think a cap of
"20"
> ("25" max) would be high enough, with ties resolved by unmodified die
rolls
> per 14.2.1.2.
>
> It's beginning to sound like there is a consensus for starting over, isn't
> it?  I would be interested in hearing from Mike and Sterling, too.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:eia-bounces@xxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Kyle H
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 6:04 AM
> To: public list for an Empires in Arms game
> Subject: Re: [eia] impasse
>
>
> > I thought that bidding was too high immediately after seeing the
results,
> > honestly.
> >
>
>     I agree.  And that's why I ended up with Turkey.  :-)  The trouble is:
> how do you stop someone from paying too much for something they really
want?
> I don't see how you can prevent people from bidding foolishly if they want
> to.
>
> kdh
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia

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