In a multi-player campaign where different players represent different states how many times do you find that.
1. When one player attacks another and prospers and cripples that attacked player somewhat or significantly.
A. The other players come to the aid of the stricken player and in a spirit of "balance of power" gang up on the now superior player and take him down a peg
or
B. The others players attack the stricken player like jackals and attempt to carve out a piece for the3mselves and become the lackeys and lickspittles of the superior power.
2. In games with economic or resource manipulation in it, players will
A. Seek to maximize long term benefit and stable accumulation
or
B. Try and find a loophole that will give them crushing economic power easily translated to immediate military resources, but fail (because there is none) and then lose interest in the game.
3. In the field of diplomacy have you seen players working on the idea of
A.Conceive of diplomacy as the cultivation of a long term accrual of interest and cooperation not to be given up lightly, and working out carefully who will divide what,
or
B. Have no more idea of diplomacy than Hitler in a succession of "You, me, he, and she will sell out the other guy, then "You, me, and he wills ell out she, then "You and me will sell out he, then I will sell you out."
4. Games are crafted with careful attention to supposed national interest and obvious objectives which are clearly spelled out.
A. Which players follow and keep careful track of and pursue assiduously
or
B. They attack other players they don't like regardless of the entirely logical and ordained Victory Conditions.
5. Assume in your game Pat and Mike are two of the players in two of the positions. Pat Attacks Mike and defeats him in a battle. Mike is now under something of a disadvantage.
A. Mike bravely soldiers on and tries to recover his position and plays masterfully
or
B. Mike simply drops out and doesn't play again.
6.You are in a game where individual initiative is allowed. For example, a game where Research and Development and some technological progress is allowed depending on your devotion of resources to it. How many times have you seen players
A. Go with it and attempt to accrue several small advantages by development and improvement of existing technology and growth
or
B. Attempt to make the wonder weapon, like develop the atomic Bomb in World War one.
Finally Assume you are in a game where you are allowed to make up your own Victory Conditions, and these can be whatever your wish, and they do not have to be zero sum, that is they MAY be that you must gain your conditions at the expense of other players, or they MAY be that they can be gained entirely on your own, for example, be a patron of the arts, or want to stockpile money and make Scrooge McDuck's Money bin look like your little brothers piggy bank. Regardless, it involves your putting some large portion of resources available to you up at risk, and serious risk at that. The game would thereby allow for the possibility of more than one "winner" (You build your money bin and I conquer Russia)say.
A. Would you sign up for such a game and make your own victory conditions.
or
B. Not know how to do it and not sign up for a game.
If you chose B
A. would it be that you can't see how you could have a game with multiple winners,
or
B. READ CAREFULLY!!!
In order for YOUR WIN to be valid, you must achieve it at the NOT ONLY at the expense of some one else, but that, that player must feel and have a sense of loss.
Example. You are Prussia, your enemy is Saxony. You take over half of his country, he however chose his victory conditions to be collecting art and being a patron of the humanities. You have half his country, but he has his diamonds, composers, libraries, art galleries, and mistresses, and 357 recognized bastard children.
S
of 
