Momentum 2 - Finished - Psycho/Pan wins!

[Psycho]

Originally Posted by Valerius

I'm not sure if I agree with your assessment (and, more importantly, at least one other player doesn't) but I see what you're saying. But if that's the case, then the role of other nations is to play kingmaker - it doesn't really matter what side they choose as it won't win them the game.

What I am saying is act now if you are interested in prolonging the game. If the tables switch and I become the first runner, then by all means everyone attack me. Don't play kingmaker - always attack the one currently winning the game no matter who he is. That is all.

I understand why you say you don't agree with my assessment. After all this is a game of diplomacy as much as of skill. The one other player who doesn't agree with my assessment is deluding himself.

Originally Posted by SciencePro

it seems to me that the only point in attacking me was to "prove" that only vanheim can win and convince us to quit.

It won't work.

Absolutely not. I already said what the point was there. I still hope I can win, but it's mostly wishful thinking. You cannot win by any means. Still, that's not a reason to stop playing. I am not trying to convince anyone to quit, but rather to act.

[SciencePro]

Originally Posted by Psycho

I am not trying to convince anyone to quit, but rather to act.

Okay well then lets do more playing and less talking then.

[Psycho]

Originally Posted by SciencePro

Okay well then lets do more playing and less talking then.

I am doing my playing the best I can. Talking doesn't hurt it. And talking of playing, I need a 24h delay.

[Valerius]

Originally Posted by Psycho

What I am saying is act now if you are interested in prolonging the game. If the tables switch and I become the first runner, then by all means everyone attack me. Don't play kingmaker - always attack the one currently winning the game no matter who he is. That is all.

But if there's no chance of winning why would anyone want to prolong the game? I understand the idea of playing it through for the sake of the game, but to keep prolonging it by one dogpile after another doesn't seem very fun. Better to spend one's time joining a new game.

Eventually someone comes out of those fights with enough power to take on everyone else. So then everyone did play kingmaker; they just weren't sure going into the cycle of dogpiles who that would be. And of course I think you figure you could pull that off in this case.

Originally Posted by Psycho

And talking of playing, I need a 24h delay.

Ok, hosting has been postponed 24 hours.

[Psycho]

Originally Posted by Valerius

But if there's no chance of winning why would anyone want to prolong the game? I understand the idea of playing it through for the sake of the game, but to keep prolonging it by one dogpile after another doesn't seem very fun. Better to spend one's time joining a new game.

Eventually someone comes out of those fights with enough power to take on everyone else. So then everyone did play kingmaker; they just weren't sure going into the cycle of dogpiles who that would be. And of course I think you figure you could pull that off in this case.

I understand your point of view. But, if people who realized they can't win the game anymore just stopped playing and went on to join a new game, that would create unfun games with massive numbers of stalers and AIs. The other solution is help the one winning win even faster, so you could go on to a new game. Both these scenarios seem much more unfun than dogpiling the strongest. Besides, what's unfun in dogpiles?

In dominions everyone is always playing kingmaker in some sense. That can't be avoided. For me, at least, it's more fun when it's done to create a balance of power, rather than to promote a chosen player/nation.

I certainly hope I could pull it off. So could you.

[Valerius]

Originally Posted by Psycho

But, if people who realized they can't win the game anymore just stopped playing and went on to join a new game, that would create unfun games with massive numbers of stalers and AIs.

I definitely wouldn't advocate staling/AI but I think many times there are other choices. For instance, in the first Cripple Fight game Meglobob and I fought a long war - it was a fun 1 vs 1 fight but largely irrelevant as more powerful nations decided the game winner. I don't really feel we had a responsibility to stop our war and dogpile the leader(s) but some might disagree and say we should have done exactly that. I think there's a responsibility to the game but not an obligation to proceed with a certain course of action.

Originally Posted by Psycho

Both these scenarios seem much more unfun than dogpiling the strongest. Besides, what's unfun in dogpiles?

Well, I guess that all depends on which side you're on. As I recall Executor wasn't too fond of his experiences with them.

Originally Posted by Psycho

In dominions everyone is always playing kingmaker in some sense. That can't be avoided. For me, at least, it's more fun when it's done to create a balance of power, rather than to promote a chosen player/nation.

That's an interesting point but I have to admit if someone has been a good ally but played a better game, such that they are a leading nation and I am out of the running, I would hesitate to turn on them. If I weren't giving myself a chance to win but just helping a third nation get the win I doubt I would do so (If the third nation has also been my enemy then the decision is easy ).

Originally Posted by Psycho

I certainly hope I could pull it off. So could you.

Hmm, so maybe it's better to be the second ranking power so that you can capitalize on such a situation than it is to be the leader who gets dogpiled? Guess I should have thought of that before casting GoNB.

[Psycho]

Originally Posted by Valerius

I definitely wouldn't advocate staling/AI but I think many times there are other choices. For instance, in the first Cripple Fight game Meglobob and I fought a long war - it was a fun 1 vs 1 fight but largely irrelevant as more powerful nations decided the game winner. I don't really feel we had a responsibility to stop our war and dogpile the leader(s) but some might disagree and say we should have done exactly that. I think there's a responsibility to the game but not an obligation to proceed with a certain course of action.

Yes, that is also a nice option. I don't know the exact game situation, so I can't say what I would do, but if my nation was irrelevant in the big picture, it could be fun to pursue a private little war against a good opponent.

Originally Posted by Valerius

Well, I guess that all depends on which side you're on. As I recall Executor wasn't too fond of his experiences with them.

Haha, yes I remember some of his frustrations. But, there were really some over the top situations with him. He was dogpiled by 3-4 nations at times when he wasn't near to being the game leader.

Originally Posted by Valerius

That's an interesting point but I have to admit if someone has been a good ally but played a better game, such that they are a leading nation and I am out of the running, I would hesitate to turn on them. If I weren't giving myself a chance to win but just helping a third nation get the win I doubt I would do so (If the third nation has also been my enemy then the decision is easy ).

Well of course there are different positions on the matter. I stated mine, but I respect others as well. I guess it's situational. I try to keep in mind that this is not a team game and that playing it as a team may be unfair to other players who didn't have a team of their own.

Originally Posted by Valerius

Hmm, so maybe it's better to be the second ranking power so that you can capitalize on such a situation than it is to be the leader who gets dogpiled? Guess I should have thought of that before casting GoNB.

It proved not to be the case in this game, but it most often is. Keep that in mind for your future games. Also, there's the Sun Tzu's principle - try to appear weak when you are in fact strong. That was much easier done with gem gens. Graphs off would help as well.