Re: [eia] losing players

[Michael Gorman <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>]

At 12:08 AM 7/24/2005, you wrote:
> > My enjoyment from the game came from thinking of it as a long term 
> endeavor.
> > Since Joel and Mike have pointed out many reasons why a short term strategy
> > is often optimal, I am very much less interested in playing.  So much so
> > that I don't think it's worth my while any more.
>
> I think this is a misunderstanding.  I thought that Joel and later Mike were
> trying to say that in the _present_case_, Britain had a big lead and could
> control others' chances to reverse the fortunes of the game by controlling 
> sea
> access.  As a result, the best thing would be to declare GB the winner and 
> move
> on to another campaign.  I did _not_ take their arguments to apply to 
> campaigns
> in general, and in fact my impression is that they think players who follow a
> short-term strategy should and probably will lose.
>
> I am convinced enough by the arguments about the present game that I think we
> should start over, but I feel this is a very, very exceptional case, and that
> in almost all instances one player being in the lead is not sufficient cause
> for ending a campaign.  Does anyone disagree with this ?  If so, I would like
> to know.
>
> -JJY

JJ is correct.  My expectations is that this game has shown us pretty much 
the upper limit.  Everything fell together right.  By whatever combination 
of planning and luck, JJ came out ahead in action after action and he 
racked up points at a huge rate.  In our last game, no one was doing that 
and I completely agree that that game ended at a point that it should not 
have.  I don't see any way to avoid a game ending if people get really fed 
up with it, but I don't think this game is at this point so I'm not that 
concerned that the next game will.  This game is just one where one player 
blitzed ahead.

As far as incentive, JJ doesn't need an incentive to win early, has to 
choose to not win early.  And there is no incentive in the game to throw 
away victory points in order to not win.  And that is what has to happen 
for someone else to catch up.  Yes, cooperative victories are entirely 
within the scope of this game, but JJ has to avoid victory in order to have 
one and that just seems silly.

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