Would like to bring to the attention of the thoughtful members of this list
a topic and see if an interesting discussion results.
Flattery will get you everywhere. No doubt the other experienced, intelligent and good looking chaps on the list will respond 
That is the subject
of 'defeatism'.
It has been noted before, on this list, that the will to resist collapses
before the means of reisistance. Several books have been published,
recently, in the USA explaining why the Confederacy's will to resist eroded
faster than its means of reistance. In more recent times even the
determined warrior society of Japan surrendered to the US while thousands of
airplanes and millions of troops were still in the field.
Yes, but you need to take into account the importance of opinion. It is easy for historians to look at the Confederate or Japanese war machine, with the benefit of hindsight, and say "they could have held out longer," but it's only opinion, and what matters is the opinion of the people concerned at the time. I suppose a bold historian might argue that the Confederacy could have held out long enough to secure a better peace, or even turn the war around again, but I doubt it. It would certainly be hard to argue that for the Japanese. And nonetheless, what matters is not when a people say "we are utterly defeated" but when they say "we can no longer hope to win this, let's call it a day."
In RL it's about limiting the suffering of the people. In ME it's often about stemming the flow of cash hemorrhaging from one's bank account into that of Harlequin. Certainly it is often possible to play on for another 20 turns in order to make the enemy really work for your defeat (I've seen this done) but is it entertainment value for £3.90 a turn? I think not.
In the Middle Earth Context it often happens that one side, or the other,
will gain a superiority in the mid-game. The opponet will then often drop
at some near point. From my observations, the process runs with the most
discouraged quiting first and the less discouraged quit soon thereafter.
Which is why good teams agree to "concede as a team" or to continue as a team. There was some talk of pre game agreements once, where players could say they wanted this condition or not, but I'm pleased to say that in my recent games, players have just presumed it, and even fed up ones have agreed to play on until the majority want to concede, or at least play on for a few turns until a standby can come in. With such an arrangement a team can encourage someone whose had a bad few turns to continue, or encourage a "play to the death" bore to call it a day, and save everyone (including the honourable opposition) from huge expenditure.
In the old GSI/Deft days a common strategy was to assess, as best you could,
the enemy. You would factor in personal knowledge, items on the message
board, observations of play, rumors, etc. You would then concentrate on the
opponents you felt were the 'weakest' and most inexperienced. These would
get tired of receiving a pounding and drop. Since GSI and Deft did not fill
vacancies after the early game, the more determined and experienced would
become isolated and swamped with numbers and resources.
That's still done to a certain extent. Maybe we lose something by having the dropouts replaced, but I think we gain a lot more - try fighting an enemy in a corner, when he drops early, and you have to spend 5 turns harvesting undefended pops. Not much fun.
There are certain symptoms that can be observed in a player who is getting
discouraged ans will soon quit. These are:
1. Spending insufficuent time on their orders. Seldom discussing them with
others. This accelerates the slide into the pit.
Yes, but this applies more generally, as an attribute of "poor players". Some players who have been playing for a long time, and are presumed therefore to be "very experienced" turn out to be poor planners and poor communicators.
2, Making repetitive and preventable errors. We all make mistakes and I
have made some beauts. The key here is repetitive. Such as always putting
the wrong artifact number on the orders or always moving east when they
wanted to go west. The subconcious is sabotaging things to get the painful
experience over with.
Yeah, but I do this even when winning. It's not a sign of defeatism but:
- Middle age
- Nagging persons of a particular gender yak yak yakking in one's ear when one is trying to have some quality time with the turnsheet
- Too many games
- Sore eyes from too many hours on computer
- Still not having MEOW the promised Saviour for Order Botchers
- Planning too early, then changing orders multiple times as the Slow Joes report in
- Being too busy telling everyone else what to do, to do own turn carefully.
3. Loss of situational awareness such as stealing gold from an ally's camp
Minor error.
or not noticing that strange and unexplored town on their map.
Yes, but that can be laziness, and often effects players consistently. I often map for the team. Some chaps report carefully every turn, some hardly bother, but I don't notice a particular change in their practice when a game goes badly. It's basically just military sense - some appreciate the importance of maps and would make Wellington proud. Some think "elan" is more important than paperwork and resemble First Wolrd War generals.
4. Forgetting the mission. For example, one of his characters is suppose
to scout for a joint company but does not.
Yes, probably, but again, some players just do that because they are poor players, dopey, busy, being nagged at the time, or (most commonly for experienced players) playing too many games.
I'll add one though, which I think is actually _more_ diagnostic than your 4:
5. Reduced tolerance of other players' opinions, and declining ability to receive criticism. When you see a player "throw his toys out of the pram" after someone has questioned aspects of his play, rather than defend his actions in friendly debate, or accept the remarks as useful advice, then it's a sure sign that he won't last long - or that other players will part company with him.
Laurence G. Tilley
http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk
···
At 16:54 06/09/2002, you wrote:
