Completely OOC discussion here. I was asked (not saying by who) why I am not turning against India to prolong the game and give someone else a chance to win. I was actually taken aback by this question. We are playing a game here right, which means there has to be a winner. In what game do people in the lead slack off to allow the people losing to catch up and possibly win? Games don't work like that.
I was also accused of not doing the game justice by having such a longstanding alliance with India. Personally I was a little offended by this statement. How am I not doing the game justice. I have diplomatically played the game, provided stories as much as I can and played within the rules of the game. In my opinion I have upheld the spirit of the game in my actions.
Maybe I'm blind here, but I don't see what I'm doing wrong and certainly don't see why I should be working for someone else to win. Perhaps someone has a personal vendetta against India?
I was also accused of not doing the game justice by having such a longstanding alliance with India. Personally I was a little offended by this statement. How am I not doing the game justice. I have diplomatically played the game, provided stories as much as I can and played within the rules of the game. In my opinion I have upheld the spirit of the game in my actions.
Maybe I'm blind here, but I don't see what I'm doing wrong and certainly don't see why I should be working for someone else to win. Perhaps someone has a personal vendetta against India?
Comment