poor communication

Hi guys,
just wanted to offer an apology to those who have written to me recently in-game. I will be honest and say I have been struggling with the game (recognising names, mechanics of the rules etc) and it ate away at my enjoyment. For about 3 or 4 turns I have seriously debated dropping and on one turn submitted nothing. The others were bare minimum.

Anyway replying to letters, to me, is a simple common courtesy and Ive not done that for 4 turns. I am a bit refocused and will aim to play catch up with letters. Please bear with me

Paul

Hi Paul - I hope you're well. You're not alone in questioning your continued involvement: it seems half the starting players have left. I too have struggled with several things, such as:
- The ban on player communications outside the game, made more frustrating by unreliable comms within the game;
- Sickness levels. This summer I had a number of SL0 legions march out, fight no battles and return to camp. Now they have SL4 (with no illness reported) and four months of inaction (rest in camp) may be required for full recovery. I thought legionaires were tough...;
- Rusting armour. I don't feel this adds to the game. Couldn't we assume there is automatic upkeep/replacement, which should mean much less bookkeeping for Agema? (One of my legions now has half a dozen different replacement dates);
- Following on from these, the game fee feels like poor value when major units are just recovering or replacing equipment; and
- Like you, I'm learning the mechanics and NPC tips would be most helpful.

To the long term Agema players, how do you feel? Is there any chance that things will be changed due to player feedback?

Johntindall wrote:Hi Paul - I hope you're well. You're not alone in questioning your continued involvement: it seems half the starting players have left. I too have struggled with several things, such as:
- The ban on player communications outside the game, made more frustrating by unreliable comms within the game;
- Sickness levels. This summer I had a number of SL0 legions march out, fight no battles and return to camp. Now they have SL4 (with no illness reported) and four months of inaction (rest in camp) may be required for full recovery. I thought legionaires were tough...;
- Rusting armour. I don't feel this adds to the game. Couldn't we assume there is automatic upkeep/replacement, which should mean much less bookkeeping for Agema? (One of my legions now has half a dozen different replacement dates);
- Following on from these, the game fee feels like poor value when major units are just recovering or replacing equipment; and
- Like you, I'm learning the mechanics and NPC tips would be most helpful.

To the long term Agema players, how do you feel? Is there any chance that things will be changed due to player feedback?

I like the RIB game (not as much as scrabble) but agree that its a slow burner and the Barbarians seem to be having rather more fun than the Romans. With a Senate, Guard & current Emperor clearly designed to be some of the most annoying NPC's in any Agema game EVER and clearly designed to drive Roman players so up the wall that one of them stabs Nero to death in a fit of frustration.

Think it may help player morale if they keep this game design in mind when they are feeling picked on and frustrated when yet another of their perfectly reasonable plans to restore the Roman Empire or even introduce some sane fire regulations is shot down in flames by the above (played by the GM). My theory is carry a little black book of Agema NPC's who are on the next proscription list and grind the ***** down before they do it to you. That or you go with the original game design and start to sharpen your knife.

Not having really been involved in a military side of game, though I did notice a Engineer detachment gain a sickness level marching a few miles along a perfectly good road between two major cities in lovely weather in one of the most civilized provinces in the Empire, not in a good position to comment. However from what others have said the military game would seem to be a lot about effort management, logistics and favours brutal realism over playability and player fun.

Richard might listen to player feed-back on this topic and tone things down a bit so SL only gained by something positively bad like unit getting filled with Parthian arrows rather than taking a gentle walk rolling a six on a D6 and gaining a sickness level. Taking a leaf out of some other games wonder if:-

a) In Unit resting in major city or attended by specialist medical unit if regains x2 SL rather than x1 which speeds things up a lot. Ditto Navy units in say Alexandria repair/shipyard should be able to recover faster than one doing repairs on a beach. (Taken from Glori)

b) In scrabble units can be given order to "Acclimatise" to conditions in order to reduce risk of suffering from worsening condition. Think it would be reasonable to allow units long stationed in arrid/hot conditions or cold/wet conditions to get used to them and suffer less than say a unit freshly shipped out from Italy.

c) Move troops or at least some of their equipment in carts. Having heavy shields, pilums etc loaded into carts would be a major disadvantage if suddenly attacked but was often tactic by troops who wanted a easier and quicker trip.

d) Ref the problem of Armour rusting.........is this all armour or just one particular type? If its just the fancy high maintenance Loria Segmentata which suffers from this problem due to the chemical reaction between the bronze fittings and the iron plates you could always do what the whole Army did in the 3rd century and ditch it for something easier to keep in good condition. Even something a bit lighter and easier to wear in hot conditions without getting over heated and picking up sickness levels for fun.

PS With current state of relations between my Character, his wider family and the Guard the news that they may have picked up lots of sickness levels marching bwtween Germania and back like a Roman version of the Grand Old Duke of York in their fancy battle armour would seem to be good news. Wonder how the rebel guards in their fancy white and gold battle armour will do somewhere hot when they and they and their so called Emperor try and hunt down lighter and cooler equiped Julio-Claudian loyalists fighting for right, duty and mums pickled doormice? Really could do with the odd heart attack or death from heat stroke to show the "Will of the Gods"..........and show the **** that they should not go around murdering my Senators on the steps of the Senate and humiliating by Gens by nailing up one of our girls in public!

It is always a good idea to try and let other players know why you are not replying to letters otherwise they may reasonably conclude you have dropped.

I can't comment directly on the Rome game because I'm not in it (nor will be).  However, since it is a new game it is reasonable to assume that after a trial period the rules will be modified to enhance player enjoyment while retaining balance.  LGDR has been through several such rule sets (currently the 7th, I think), some introducing changes for the better, others for the worse.  The SL rules in LGDR (on which I think the Rome rules are based) took some getting used to, but were a huge improvement on previous systems where the actual number of recruits lost to desertion/sickness had to be sent out to the units so they could be brought back to full strength.  I remember calculating that I had to send 409 men from central recruit pool to some colony, only to find that each month they were on board ship they seemed to also suffer attrition losses, so ended up having to send another batch and multiply that number (as a best guess) to cover expected transport losses.  Within a game year I had tiny numbers of recruits all over the world, totally useless!  I think in LGDR the SL level embodies such factors as equipment malfunction or reduction in fighting ability due to supply issues, but there are usually ways to mitigate this (either through research breakthroughs or army/logistics support).  I don't know if this applies to Rome, but I suggest it probably does.  So rusty armour may well be the cause of high SL rather than lack of grain or other factors?

As for the ban on player communication outside the game, this is really a question of trust and self-interest.  There is plenty of evidence that players (of LGDR) do discuss their views outside of the game (even if that is indirectly through forum posts), indeed it is arguable if 'team' positions can function should this not happen.  My own views on this are well known and need no repetition here.  It is possible to fight a war by co-ordinating with other players if you plan a long way in advance, write long game letters and the players trust each other, but it is hard - deliberately so.  The more fundamental problem concerns diplomacy. In the past there have been attempts by some players to frankly interfere by discussing matters that should remain in game, e.g. formulation of treaties or by persistently objecting (through private messages) to a certain course of action a player has decided to take.  If they wish to pursue either of these then they should send letters in game where the recipient can reply.    Even relatively simple agreements (trade or sale of colonies, etc) usually need to be discussed at length (in letters) before a treaty is written by one of the players, so the treaty stage can often be the quickest if the groundwork has already been done through game letters.  It is naturally tempting to discuss such matters outside of the game to try and speed things up, but with the turn times as long as they are now, there is no need - just take your time to think issues through and write a long game letter covering all matters instead.  It can take months and months to negotiate peace treaties, but this is what happened in real life.  Why spoil your own enjoyment by trying to bypass the game mechanism?  That does not mean that you cannot communicate about other matters outside of the game - I do occasionally receive private messages, but am careful not to cross the line by 'negotiating' or 'discussing' matters which should be kept inside game letters.  Those who have played in games with me know I have a reputation for quite epic letters, so perhaps I am the exception, but it is how I interpret the spirit of the 'outside communication' rules. If you want to know what players think, write to them in the game - most will reply; those who don't will be putting themselves at a diplomatic disadvantage.

The length of time between game turns does seem to have become more of an issue for several players.  I have mixed feelings on this ... most players play in multiple games which fills the time in, but does not address the legitimate concern that compared to the 2-3 week turnaround when I started playing LGDR, it takes a very long time to make progress.  I can't comment on how Rome orders work, but once unlimited orders were introduced into LGDR it was inevitable that turn times would lengthen.  To some extent as players we are responsible for that by submitting pages of orders and trying to do more simply because we can (or because we have more time to think about what we put into our game turns).  As human moderated games, we are limited by that 'human' factor and over the last few years in particular there are few players who have not had 'real world' issues that have impacted on their commitment to the game.  It is perhaps more surprising that there is not an even longer delay between game turns.  Clearly it is an issue which is impacting on players (both in terms of their participation in existing games and those considering taking on new positions), but other than recruiting additional GMs or running fewer games, I don't see any easy solutions.

Thank you for your thoughts and opinions here: I am working through the process and recognise the challenges we are all talking about. Keep on keeping on.