Playing for second

[RechifMit]

This has happened to me a few times now, both in the classic game and the new Vengeance:

Someone was very high, like 191, and another player got a freeze card. Instead of freezing the guy about to go out, they froze ME instead. I was just a few points lower than they were.

When I asked why in the world they would do that, they said "sorry, I just wanted to make sure I got second at least."

So naturally the game ended, and they indeed got second. This seems like poor sportsmanship to me, as you should always try to win (we were all with in shooting distance for sure).

This happened to me yesterday in Vengeance as well, and in that game, you can throw bad modifier cards on people even after they've stayed. I had busted, and it was just one more player left. Instead of keeping going, to try to take down the leader/winner, they stayed as well. Again, guaranteeing them second.

Are people so concerned about ELO that you'd rather play for second than try to actually win the game?

[Suoivax]

Show me in the rules where it says you have to target the points leader with anything negative.

I could just as easily choose my targets alphabetically by username.

[RechifMit]

> Show me in the rules where it says you have to target the points leader with anything negative.

Did you actually read my post? Or do you just like being condescending for no good reason?

I'm talking about game strategy, and what motivates people. I specifically asked if it's common for people to "play for second" rather than make an attempt to be the actual winner. And I clarified that everyone was within shooting distance of winning so that it wasn't as if they just took the only good option.

I did not ask "did this person break the rules?"

[Bender3002]

Usually I will play to win, so targeting the player in front. However, in tournaments this might change, as the goal is not to win a single game, but the tournament or reach the highest possible position.

[Suoivax]

> Show me in the rules where it says you have to target the points leader with anything negative.

Did you actually read my post? Or do you just like being condescending for no good reason?

I'm talking about game strategy, and what motivates people. I specifically asked if it's common for people to "play for second" rather than make an attempt to be the actual winner. And I clarified that everyone was within shooting distance of winning so that it wasn't as if they just took the only good option.

I did not ask "did this person break the rules?"

Your question isnt new or original, it come up in almost every game with player interaction. It's particularly prevalent in Catan regarding the robber. "Why rob me? Im losing! You should rob the person in the lead!"

Do you feel that all players should justify their choices?