Re: [MISC] [OT] Bring and Battle

 ---- mikko wrote: 
> On Thu, 24 Sep 1998, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
> 
> >	This can be a justification for the classic method
> >	of scenario construction:
> > 
> >	Player A designs the scenario.
> >	Player B gets to pick which side they play.
> > 
> >	( from the classic method of evenly dividing a
> >	piece of pie, Sally divides it and Davy
> >	gets first pick )

this is fine for two players, but gets complicated with more than one.
really complicated. PhD's have been done on this problem. 

> It also kills the surprise factor and design fun.

true, but it works with bring + battle. if you'll excuse the pun, you
can't have your cake and eat it.
 
> This is a fundamental problem with "bidding systems" too. They assume
> that every bidder can make a fairly accurate value appraisal. In
reality,
> the less experienced players just get screwed twice.

how about teaming up a veteran with a novice: mentoring is a highly
effective way to learn. the novice doesn't get screwed and learns
quickly, the veteran gets someone to do the grunt work (moving figures,
etc) and get the coffee / fizzy pop / beer in. many experts enjoy
teaching occasionally as it gives them a chnce to show off.

alternatively, you could allocated sides randomly. the scenario designer
(who is going to be one of the players) would have an incentive to
design a fair scenario, as otherwise he would have a 50% chance of being
screwed himself.

Tom

----------------------------------------------------------------
Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com