>2. Not that much of a problem, but Vaughn (RI) quit at some >early point because the interest in the game went away because >his interesting suggestion of proxy orders got SHOT DOWN instead >of that people kindly told him that they thought it was not a >good idea. The incident brought some shadow over all the >players, I think. I blame myself a bit for Vaughn quitting, >maybe I should not have allowed the harsh mails towards him and >maybe I was not that kind myself either, and I should have >canceled the discussion earlier. Alot of players liked the >proxy idea from Vaughn, myself included, but some didn't.Well, I'm glad some people liked it... see my reply to the next point.
>3. NMR's. This was a big problem the whole game from spring 1902 >on. If one player didn't issue any orders, than two powers >actually holded all their units. If two players NMR'd, chances >were there didn't happen anything noticeable anywhere on the >board at all.This was my major gripe... although it came out a bit differently for me. My point was that anyones partner could, in affect, shoot the whole partnership in the foot by merely not submitting orders, or submitting hold orders etc. I like (obviously) the idea of proxy and the idea that move, convoy, support orders override hold orders. I wouldn't have minded writing good move orders for my country and still getting in an arguement with my partner..but merely being continually blackmailed...
>4. Winning conditions are simply not that good. When a player >reached 15 centers (as Cory did), his co-workes simply >'blocked' all armies of the countries of Cory because if he >went on to 18, he would have won. This 18-14 centers to win was >really a great strain on the game.This is another aspect of the same thing. If move orders overrode hold orders or something....then the player getting to big could at least *try* to increase... whereas now he can be indefinetly blocked by his partner even when his partners are *on vacation*. I would propose..
Sincerly,
Vaughn