First inkling that you�ve won/lost an MP Game?

[Zeldor]

ano:

Being small in late game can be quite fun, you can get some action, cooperate with someone bigger. The worst thing is to be in the middle with real chance to win, but there are many people in the ssame position and they all need to cooperate to get the first guy down. Some people are even so stupid to team with the strongest guy. And well... they get absolutely nothing from that. The other hard case are people that join new game just to hurt someone, because they got beaten by him in a different game. The join, suicide and start early war, taking both of them down.

[ano]

vfb:
Well, that's my attitude)) I get no fun if I see no chance to win. If someone does then it's up to him to decide what to do
As for me, it's practically better to work on mistakes and prepare to another fight a bit better (however, games are often lost due to starting unluck)

Zeldor:
I agree.

[vfb]

Zeldor:

Carrying over a grievance from one game to another is a violation of Sheap's rules. Of course, not all games are played by Sheap's rules, I just wish they were.

Teaming with the strongest player is not good it you don't have a secret plan to win. But if he is not too far ahead, and you are in a position to, say, snap up all the rear provinces of another nation while the biggest nation is stuck in a bunch of sieges, you may have an opportunity to become the leader yourself. It's really risky to do this, and evil, and everyone will hate you. But hey, being evil can be fun too!

ano:

Yes, it sounds like we've got different goals in playing. I'm not saying I don't care about winning. I always start with a plan to win now. It's just that there are so many obstacles! Those obstacles are AKA other players. When my plan doesn't work out, I just need a new plan. From the historical perspective, my plans have a 0% chance of success unfortunately. However, I still enjoy making my schemes and plans, no matter how remote the chance of victory.

Plus I also enjoy the story of the game. It's not like I'm playing Risk. I am the leader of my nation, and I will lead them to glorious victory, or death! (Most likely death).

And I will get my revenge on Arco for the massacre of the sages! (Because if I didn't, I might as well go play chess.)

Dedas:

Sorry, I misunderstood your post completely! I think I understand now, thanks for the explanation. I often ascribe imaginary personalities to the gods of the other nations. Makes it more fun for me, that's all!

[sansanjuan]

Very nice to read all these poignant replies. Thank you all for the responses.

To an earlier point regarding �lost� I might restate that as �when you realized your pretender would not ascend as the One True God�.

I've played a number of MMORPG games and this was my first try at a PBEM game. It's great fun, though hard to explain to the wife (�it's like an international game of Risk with storylines, magic, tons of units, a dominion influence components and...... 1x10e9 ways of winning!... umm, ok , it's not like Risk at all except for the map�)


-SSJ

[thejeff]

It's probably also true that teaming up to stop the strongest will just replace him with the next strongest. So if you're not second or maybe third why bother.

You could just go AI, when you're far enough behind to be out of the running. But if you're having fun in a war with your rival why not continue.

[llamabeast]

You can't really have winning as your only objective in an MP game, because the chances are strongly against it happening. I think setting yourself to AI as soon as you think you're unlikely to win is a bit unsporting.

[Dedas]

I've found that the way towards the goal is often more rewarding than the goal in itself. But if you somehow achieve the goal and also took the time to enjoy the way towards it, it will be an even more rewarding experience. So all in all you have very little to lose, taking your time with the turns, relaxing and letting your imagination have its way.

[Velusion]

llamabeast said:
You can't really have winning as your only objective in an MP game, because the chances are strongly against it happening. I think setting yourself to AI as soon as you think you're unlikely to win is a bit unsporting.

That's why I usually try to cultivate and grow slights into deep resentments... so when I know I can't win I can play just to tear someone down.

[Dedas]

What I meant was that I sometimes like to think (read: role play) that there is such a reason behind the passiveness of a player. In reality there could be lots of reasons of course. If some of them make I good story I role play them as well.

In-game (not real) grudges between players makes a good game for me as well, as it adds atmosphere. Although if I have ambitions for world domination I try to not get involved in them. That usually means I'm pretending to look down on them.

Sometimes I just let myself go with imagined fury for the wrongs that player x or y has done to my nation and swear revenge matter the costs. I like to think that my people are with me on that and that the whole religion around me (I'm a pretender God right) is rapidly declining into a everyones quest for personal vengeance on the wrong doers.

If you do it with well it is much more entertaining than just winning a computer game.