The politics of losing

[LDiCesare]

Originally Posted by SsSam

I guess I'm curious if so many players "never" concede, then how do your games ever end? I don't mean that in an inflammatory way, I'm honestly curious. I'm at turn 90 in a game and if we consistently choose #2 or #3, I could see this game going 200+ turns.

I've got a game past turn 150. And it's a pretty long one and I wonder whether it'll ever finish.
I've seen several games where the balance of power is clearly in favor of one or two and the rest can't do anything like king-making. Those where several player are mostly equal in pwoer can indeed drag. That's why I personally favor smaller games now (4 players is great imo), or victory conditions like a deadline or 2/3rds of the provinces or some such which means that the game will eventually end.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by LDiCesare

I've got a game past turn 150. And it's a pretty long one and I wonder whether it'll ever finish.
I've seen several games where the balance of power is clearly in favor of one or two and the rest can't do anything like king-making. Those where several player are mostly equal in pwoer can indeed drag. That's why I personally favor smaller games now (4 players is great imo), or victory conditions like a deadline or 2/3rds of the provinces or some such which means that the game will eventually end.

I would also argue that smaller games give greater replayability as there will not always be an end game stage. The game might never get beyond mid game. The result is some nations which would never otherwise be taken, suddenly become powers, like TNN.