Adam Day Wellllll… I don’t feel comfortable painting those players with such a broad moral brush. And not just because this is something that I might do.

IMO the threat of sinking the game is a legitimate tool in your arsenal if the game is well designed. I haven’t played enough Swamped to know if it is. Archipelago is robust enough to handle it, as long as everyone super-tuned-in to the pitfalls of handing a probable loser too much leverage. That said, it’s so very hard to play well that I think most players think the game can’t handle it. So it happens and folks feel like it’s the game’s fault.

But, like, if you’re in a position where you can threaten to sink the game in order to secure concessions, and those concessions don’t in turn guarantee someone else’s loss, then you know, game on. IMO. But if you’ve put the other guy in a no-win situation — let me win or we all lose — that’s pretty shitty.

It’s a problem of the design space that hasn’t been especially well addressed yet. But I blame the design, not the player! Everyone loses is a rational choice if that choice is what’s made available to you.