Re: [eia] impasse

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    Well, I would see your point if this game had only one winner.  Clearly,
Great Britain will have no trouble meeting its victory point total.
However, for many of us, victory is still up in the air.
    I'm not going to have a fit if we decide to start over.  I'm just tired
of quitting after 2.5-3 years of game time.  It's getting old.  And on the
selfish side, I spent over 2 years of game time fighting a punishing war,
and as Turkey, I'm just now getting a chance to reap the benefits.  So I
feel like (just like in the last game), as soon as my country is coming out
of a dark period and getting a chance to improve its prospects, the game is
ending.
    Again, I'll agree to go along with everyone and start over.  But I can
say one thing for absolutely sure: if the next game ends in 1807, it will be
my last time playing EIA.

kdh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Gorman" <mpgorman@xxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 2:47 PM
Subject: RE: [eia] impasse


> At 11:08 AM 7/21/2005, you wrote:
> >I'm not dead set on bidding caps, I was just throwing mud on the wall.
:)
> >
> >And I agree with Kyle wholeheartedly that we will never finish a game if
we
> >continue to start over.  That was my reason for stating that we need to
> >decide on a mechanism to prevent it, whether that mechanism is UMPs or
> >something else.  I am content to continue our current game, but if the
> >majority opinion is to start over then I'm not entirely opposed either.
>
> One of the points I think we're skipping here is that what Joel is saying
> is the this game isn't ending early, it's over.
>
> JJ has won smashingly on every front and Britain is really, really far
> ahead.  I can conceive of maybe winning with him if Britain delays victory
> by giving up points to reduce others totals, but that's about it.  If JJ
> just keeps going, he's going to win easily, the only question is does he
> slow himself down to take someone else along.
>
> So it is entirely valid to say this was a short game where one power just
> kicked-ass so it ends early.  Something to be impressed by, not something
> to complain about.
>
> In our last game, we were in the middle of the wars that might have let
> someone break out into the lead, but it was not clear if that would happen
> or who would break out, so that was a game that we ended early, not a game
> that was done.
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia

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