Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners

From: johnb@wotangate.sc.ti.com (John Bach)

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000

In article meb@post.gsfc.nasa.gov, Kevin McGee <kdmcgee@aol.com> () writes:
>dcd@nasa.kodak.com (Dennis DeYoung) wrote:
>>In article jib@runner.ccr-p.ida.org, desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>>>
>>> I'm familiar with it enough to know all of the reasons
>>> why I don't want to play it, which is plenty for me.
>>>
>>> If the idea of someone else playing to achieve the victory conditions
>>> so pisses you off, you are in for a lot of disappointments.
>>>
>>>                                        David desJardins
>>>--
>>>Copyright 1995 David desJardins.  Unlimited permission is granted to quote
>>>from this posting for non-commercial use as long as attribution is given.
>>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>For the record then, let us attribute the above stupidity to David.
>>
>>David, there are many games which have rules that allow things which
>>are actually against the spirit of the game.  In most sports and games
>>you will find an acknowledgment of this fact in the front of the rulebook
>>along with a note that it should be discouraged.  While joining late is
>>technically legal, it is against the spirit of the game which intends
>>conflict and action.  You should earn a victory, not get it by default.
>>The player Kevin was complaining about was not "playing to achieve the
>>victory conditions" as you said, but rather sitting still, paying $6.50
>>per turn, and building up his troop count without loosing any while others
>>defeated the enemy, loosing troops in the process, with the end result
>>that this guys opposing team was gone AND he had more troops than his
>>"allies" thus giving him more victory points.
>>
>>I have never seen `sitting still for 15 turns' listed under any nation in
>>ME-PBM as a victory condition.
>>
>>         - Dennis
>>
>>dcd@nasa.kodak.com
>>
>>
>
>
>Hear, hear!  My point exactly.  A strategy is not honorable, enjoyable
>or desirable just because the rules allow it.  Of course if "winning" in
>the stricitest, narrowest sense is your only objective...go for it.  Such
>mundane, nonaggrandizing things as team-building, team play and team
>success are only for us chumps.
>
>Kevin McGee
>

I always thought winning was one of the reasons people played games.  Other
reasons include the social, teamwork related issues, but competition (team or
individual) is still central.

If a game has individual victory conditions which allow victory by sitting around
and not doing anything, that seems to be a flaw.  The game may still be worth
playing, but the flaw is there.

References

Re: ME-PBM Late Joiners
Kevin McGee <kdmcgee@aol.com>
Tue, 11 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0000