If everyone were to adopt a drawist outlook, games would be horribly boring. Carebearism.
Ambition spices things up. Makes for more lively dynamics. Diplomatic constellations shifting and changing constantly. Drawism leads to static alliances. That's why one actually owes it to one's fellow-players to show morale, ambition!
A good player will give his best. And giving his best means maximising his chances of winning. Chances are, he'll experience a thrilling game. He's willing to take risks. He'll prove a fighter. He won't pick the easy way. The path of least resistance.
Someone who has strong drawist inclinations is unlikely to take on tough challenges. He'll choose the path of least resistance.
That's why the sometimes voiced sentiment of "I'm working towards a draw, but will go for the solo if the opportunity arises" has got it all backwards. If you're working towards a draw, you'll be in league with several other big guys. You'll join them in taking out the weak guys. But that is precisely the course that works against one's chances of soloing! Someone who aims for the solo has an active interest in keeping the board weak, fractured and divided. Often the (relative) minnows are his greatest asset. Be it as grateful allies or as soft targets for the last few SCs.
The one who doesn't strive for the solo in a purposeful fashion, defeats himself on day one. He may pride himself for having got lots of SCs by the end of the game. But it's empty pride. For he has never given the game his all. He's chosen the least path of resistance. Quite frankly, I'd rate such a performance below someone's who strove for a solo from day one, made hard decisions, took risks that - ultimately - got him eliminated.
The drawist grown fat on SCs defeated himself. He never gave his all. Promoted circumstances detrimental to his soloing chances.
As far as I'm concerned, not the one's who got eliminated (or just survived) in a game ending in a draw did worst. No, it's the ones who have many SCs to their name. They're the ones most defeated by a draw. For they're closest to the prize. And it was denied to them.
And if they never meant to go strongly for that prize? Well, they're doubly defeated. By the others, but especially by themselves. I'd rate that as a quite shameful performance. Whatever the tactical acumen shown along the way. The grand strategy being self-defeating and the height of timidity!
You owe it to yourself and your fellow-players to seek to win. This really shouldn't be so hard or controversial.
I challenge you: Can anyone deny this?
