I think I now understand Cohen

[Zapmeister]

Cainehill said:
Otherwise, you're shafting the other players in the game, not just your nemesis, kinda like quiting a game of risk or monopoly. The big bad probably gets to gobble up the AI run nation quicker than it would have against you.

This is the key to the whole thing. I do still have a lot of territory. However, I'm incapable of defending it. My nemesis may gobble it a little more quickly against the AI, but not a whole lot more quickly. Nonetheless, I acknowledge that I wouldn't be doing the other players any favours by doing this.

But there's another issue. As you say, it's not a "boatload of fun" playing positions like this. Where does my obligation to spend not-fun-time in order to protect other people's fun-time start and end? Some such obligation exists, I would say, but it may be that I can't play as well as the AI in the time I'm obliged to give.

[Cainehill]

Zapmeister said:

But there's another issue. As you say, it's not a "boatload of fun" playing positions like this. Where does my obligation to spend not-fun-time in order to protect other people's fun-time start and end? Some such obligation exists, I would say, but it may be that I can't play as well as the AI in the time I'm obliged to give.

Speaking of obligation, I missed somewhat in your original post.

What about your obligation to not join a game that explicitly asks for "No Quitters" if you're going to quit? You're not having any success, so therefor you're not having any fun, so therefor you want to quit.

Tell me - is the first time you've ever run into a situation where you can't seem to do anything??? I mean - I've been through it in a couple dozen games, probably. I wouldn't think it was the first time for you either.

So - you joined a game that asked for players who were willing to play through to the bitter end, figuring you'd only keep playing as long as you're doing well enough. Bravisimo. (Applause gremlin)

This is the sort of thing that makes me wish we could have a sticky topic, maybe just one post, with the names of people who quit, especially after voluntarily undertaking an obligation not to do so in a given game.

What's so hard to understand about, "please don't join if you're going to quit"?

And frankly, Machaka has any number of things that should work well against Vans and even air queens, depending on immunities and MR.

Vans don't fight very well when blind. Nor when entangled. They're quite vulnerable to blade wind, which Machaka can get casters for pretty easily. Likewise, Machaka can get casters for Charm without too much difficulty. And casters for their own Ghost Riders, and Call of the Wild for stealth armies, etc, etc.

Albeit I guess you are possibly discovering why I think Mad Castling isn't the problem, raiders having too great an advantage is. You can never ever catch them in the province they're in, save for air trapeze, teleport, etc, which mostly pit a couple of casters against an army, and which are screwed if the raiders are over your fort.

There really, REALLY ought to be a chance for one army to catch another - as any juggler can tell you, there is no such thing as simultaneity.

[Zapmeister]

Cainehill said:
What about your obligation to not join a game that explicitly asks for "No Quitters" if you're going to quit? You're not having any success, so therefor you're not having any fun, so therefor you want to quit.

Sure. My understanding was that the rule was to prevent people from quitting as soon as the going got tough, not to prevent people from quitting when they feel totally defeated. I'm not the first nation to go AI in this game (if I do) although I would be the largest. But as I've argued elsewhere, counting provinces doesn't translate into winning chances.

Tell me - is the first time you've ever run into a situation where you can't seem to do anything??? I mean - I've been through it in a couple dozen games, probably. I wouldn't think it was the first time for you either.

It's not. I do try to tough out the bad times, because I take the point that you can't always be a winner, and some un-fun time when you're losing is the price to pay for the fun-time when you're winning. My position here is not that I'm losing, it's that I've lost, and I see a big difference there. Stronger players than I may be able to turn the position around, but that's not the point.

What's so hard to understand about, "please don't join if you're going to quit"?

Nothing, if it's that clear. But as I said, I'm not the first player to quit this game (if I do).