Dear Leo,
Well, here we are. And where is that, you ask? Exactly where Tony knew we would be all along.
I have to admit, it was a brilliant strategy on Tony's part -- always and only for his solo victory. You once might have thought that you were Tony's co-equal partner in this game, but I hope by now you can see that this was never the case. By now we all know the story: Early on, Tony and you conceived an incorruptible alliance, an alliance which would at the very least ensure your shared domination of the map, and which would also very likely lead to a clean solo victory for one of you (a victory which the winner would magnanimously share in spirit with the less fortunate partner). But is that the whole truth, and nothing but? I think not.
For, you see, from the beginning, the possibility of a clean English victory was slim to nil. (What do I mean by a "clean" victory? I mean a victory that wouldn't require a player with 9 or 10 units -- i.e., a player who has as good a chance of winning this game as anyone else, a chance which should mean something to him -- to retreat, mechanically and voluntarily, from his supply centers; in other words, a victory that is truly in the spirit of this game.) By agreeing only to build fleets for the first few years, you all but forfeited any chance you had of winning cleanly. With France out of the way quickly -- a stroke of luck, you must admit -- and no enemy in the north, Tony was free to push all of his forces into the south and east. It was always much, much more likely that Tony rather than you would win this game outright. But there was also always the possibility that the other players would gang up in time to stop the juggernaut, and, after some unfortunate stops and starts, gang up we did. Now we are in a classic stalemate. But Tony has -- has always had, I suspect -- a Plan B.
The notion that "one" of you might eventually have to sacrifice himself for the technical victory of the "other" was a sham from the very beginning. Given the current distribution of forces --the only possible distribution, as it happens, given your agreement only to build fleets and only to convoy armies to Russia -- there is only one safe play for victory, and that is Tony's. For, you see, Tony's units, unlike yours, are almost all directly on the front lines. Tony stands between us and you. If Tony had to start shedding units, it wouldn't take too long before an opening would occur for us to advance. The two of you might still be able to pull it off, but there would be a huge risk involved, and zero room for error. You, on the other hand, can shed almost all of your units before it would have any effect on the Anglo-German wall. (Think about that for a second.) You were, from the very beginning, the one who was going to take the fall.
But there's more. Tony has to know that there is no chance in hell that all of the players left in this game would agree to a draw -- and agree we all must. (Hence the "Balls Award.") Furthermore, no winner is declared in that instance. (And there is no such thing as a "dual-kingship" in this game; this is merely the chimerical idea which Tony used to convince you to go along with his strategy.) From the rulebook: "OBJECT OF THE GAME: As soon as one Great Power controls 18 supply centers, it's considered to have gained control of Europe. The player representing that Great Power is the winner. However, players can end the game by agreement before a winner is determined. In this case, all players who still have pieces on the game board share equally in a draw" (emphasis mine). Tony's gentlemanly call for a premature end of this game is a ruse.
Perhaps you're thinking at this point, why not call Tony's bluff and agree to a draw, thus ending the game without a winner? (After all, Tom controls just as many supply centers as Tony, and more supply centers than you do, so why would you, but not Tom, have a share in victory?) Why, in other words, give Tony what he wants? The answer is simple: I will have no difficulty in accepting a solo victory from Tony, as Tony will have earned it: first by conceiving a brilliant strategy to secure half of the necessary supply centers, then by convincing you to renounce your opportunity to win the game for nothing in return -- to allow him to walk right over your supine body to the end-zone. What I will not accept is being forced to call someone a winner, even a co-winner, who has not proven that he has any interest in winning.
So there will be no recognition of a "combined victory." And there will be no premature halt to this game. If you truly have opted to humiliate yourself by pointlessly handing Tony a solo victory, then I'm afraid you're actually going to have to go through with it. We're going to watch you do it, and you're going to have to watch yourself do it. But if that prospect sounds unappealing to you, then you still have the chance to win. Tom, Damian and I will support you. You have our email addresses. For once in this game, talk to us with an open mind. We will respect that you have finally decided to play this game like a human being.
If not: You've got nine supply centers; Tony needs eight more. Tony's victory would leave you with one unit; and with one unit, you will have no more reason to call yourself a winner than I currently have.
Your friend (in victory and in self-inflicted defeat),
Bill
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment