bidding, 1.03 ?

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
Perhaps the max is to limit this type of bidding???
BTW: Why do groups use a max bid?

I would think mostly to keep idiot players who simply bid very high number just so they can play France or GB. The fear is that they will quit after a few turns pass, once they find out their bid is impossible to achieve, so they can't win.

[AresMars]

ORIGINAL: Jimmer
I would think mostly to keep idiot players who simply bid very high number just so they can play France or GB. The fear is that they will quit after a few turns pass, once they find out their bid is impossible to achieve, so they can't win.

Idiot Players Jimmer -- that is a little harsh....and uncalled for....

It has already been stated that some _ very _ experienced players sometimes BID high to play specific countries....and the playing is their enjoyment, not WINNING.

I understand this type of thinking, as games are a great source of enjoyment in my life for the last 30+ years

As playing PBEM EIANW might include people a player doesnt know, this also is a necessary evil for a more enjoyable game experience for everyone.....

However, I like to also WIN a game I am playing, so I agree with some sort of control system...and there have been come excellent suggestions made here so far....


This suggestion is my particular favorite and I would support this being added to the BID TOOL as a game enhancement. Woot Thresh!

ORIGINAL: Thresh
I prefer a bid total, in that the sum of your bids cannot equal "X"...
YMMV,
Thresh

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: AresMars

ORIGINAL: Jimmer
I would think mostly to keep idiot players who simply bid very high number just so they can play France or GB. The fear is that they will quit after a few turns pass, once they find out their bid is impossible to achieve, so they can't win.

Idiot Players Jimmer -- that is a little harsh....and uncalled for....

It has already been stated that some _ very _ experienced players sometimes BID high to play specific countries....and the playing is their enjoyment, not WINNING.

I understand this type of thinking, as games are a great source of enjoyment in my life for the last 30+ years

As playing PBEM EIANW might include people a player doesnt know, this also is a necessary evil for a more enjoyable game experience for everyone.....

However, I like to also WIN a game I am playing, so I agree with some sort of control system...and there have been come excellent suggestions made here so far....


This suggestion is my particular favorite and I would support this being added to the BID TOOL as a game enhancement. Woot Thresh!

ORIGINAL: Thresh
I prefer a bid total, in that the sum of your bids cannot equal "X"...
YMMV,
Thresh

Actually calling them idiots is being KIND. I was in one of the games that Jimmer is thinking about.
We had two players - Chuck Nystrom & Dave VanHorn. Bid over 100 each for Spain & France - not the
SLIGHTEST chance to win.

They simply wanted to be able to beat up the rest of the players - once.

They did completely bone-head manuvers such as France DOWing Denmark & moving his ENTIRE
(he left >5< I in ALL OF FRANCE) to Copenhagen. The only thing that saved him was that the British
& Russian players were even bigger idiots & belived his lies. They wouldn't DOW (this game didn't
have the Britain/France start at war) & move a fleet to lock him into Copenhagen
(BRITIAN could have beaten what he had left behind). I couldn't do anything
(I was Prussia) & he did a VERY fast retreat once he figured out what I was trying to talk everyone
else into (this was Jan 1805).

After his retreat; France, Spain & Russia DOW me (Prussia) and France
& Russia DOW Austria. We both surrender (conditional) (this is an unwinnable war).
France & Spain then turn on Russia (yes he got to find out his mistake - too late[:@]).

At this point the British player drops out & Britain becomes an active TURKISH ump & the Turks have Britian DOW France.

Russia moves his army to the coast to catch the invading Spainish. Spain chickens out & decides to
force access thru Prussia. This breaks my enforced peace & >I< DOW him. Russia & I then
spend some time playing cross-boarder ping-pong with the Spanish army (his "nearest depot" is on his
fleet - at sea & adjacent to both of our territories/armies).

While this is going on; Austria also DOWs Spain & Turkey uses his & the British fleets to transport the
ENTIRE Austrian army into Spain (We had all decided that Stupidity on this scale needs to be punished).

At this point; the game ended. After 6 months. Those outrageously high bids tend to create games that
do not last.

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: AresMars
Idiot Players Jimmer -- that is a little harsh....and uncalled for....

It has already been stated that some _ very _ experienced players sometimes BID high to play specific countries....and the playing is their enjoyment, not WINNING.

I understand this type of thinking, as games are a great source of enjoyment in my life for the last 30+ years

Sorry, I wasn't clear -- poor wording on my part.

I did NOT mean to say that bidding high makes one an idiot. I meant a cap rule might exist with players who are already idiots in mind> For example, players who want to play France only so they can beat people up for a game year, and then quit. This can be a reason that people might want a bid cap.

We had a game that eventually became legendary for this in our gaming circles. I didn't even play in it, but I heard about it. Guy played in it. Two guys bid 70 and 60 (if memory serves) for France and GB. Then, they teamed up trying to beat the rest of the world. When they failed to have clear victory after a year (in fact, they were getting toasted, as I recall), they quit. Then, they had the audacity to ask to start another game! See? They started off idiots, and the game just brought out the worst in them.

[Jimmer]

ORIGINAL: gwheelock
Actually calling them idiots is being KIND. I was in one of the games that Jimmer is thinking about.
We had two players -

You probably shouldn't post real names on a public forum. I recommend you replace with pseudonyms.

However, that is exactly the game I was thinking about.

[AresMars]

GWheelock, I understand your point and I have seen similar type players in my career also.
&nbsp;
I agree with Jimmer that naming them in the open like that is not the best idea.
&nbsp;
I did not know that Jimmer was referencing specific people....sometimes the label is appropiate.&nbsp; [;)]
&nbsp;
Jimmer seems to agree with me that some sort of system to deal with the less expereinced BIDDING&nbsp;player might be in order for EIANW....
&nbsp;

Sorry, I wasn't clear -- poor wording on my part.
I did NOT mean to say that bidding high makes one an idiot. I meant a cap rule might exist with players who are already idiots in mind> For example, players who want to play France only so they can beat people up for a game year, and then quit. This can be a reason that people might want a bid cap.

I am afraid that a capped BID&nbsp;system&nbsp;STILL wont eliminate poor players, bad sportsmanship,&nbsp;players who are interested in short term play and all the other bad habits that exist.....nature of the Internet...nature of the real world also.....sigh.
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

[NeverMan]

First let me say that I believe in having some sort of cap.

Second, I guess I've just been very lucky in never having to play with any people like that.

[gwheelock]

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

ORIGINAL: gwheelock
Actually calling them idiots is being KIND. I was in one of the games that Jimmer is thinking about.
We had two players -

You probably shouldn't post real names on a public forum. I recommend you replace with pseudonyms.

However, that is exactly the game I was thinking about.

Sorry; I disagree about not naming names for something like this. The reason is that if these
two ever make it to here (doubtful) then anyone who gets into a game with them can't
say they didn't have a warning.