Re: What is to be done?

From: tandmb@sierra.net (Tony Baldacci)

Date: Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0000

In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.951203112129.1074A-100000@rigel.oac.uci.edu>,
Mark Hendrickson <eahg128@rigel.oac.uci.edu> wrote:

> Carl argues that it's bad manners not to recognize your opponents'
> victory.  First, the Circle of Hope isn't at war with the AOO, & so I
> don't necessarily see them as opponents.  Second, such logic implies that
> there can be a winner in an open ended game.  Let me quote from the
> official Olympia rules:
>
> "Olympia has no victory conditions;  no winner is ever declared."
>
> For those of us who signed up to play an open ended game as an open ended
> game, the AOO's declaration that the game is "over" rings hollow.  Let's
> see if you're still in control on turn 200.  As any historian knows,
> empires both rise _&_ fall:  the greater the empire, the greater the fall.

Good points. I don't have a problem (as I've posted elsewhere) with Carl
or anyone else claiming that they've met their own personal goals, but to
claim that you've "won" an open-ended game is flat-out ridiculous.

Unless of course, Rich Skrenta decides to stop running game 1 - but in
that case, I still don't agree with the AOO's assessment.

--
                  *** Get a life - get off AOL! ***

References

Re: What is to be done?
Mark Hendrickson <eahg128@rigel.oac.uci.edu>
Sun, 03 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0000