Now that I've finally got my new system, I've been enjoying some decent team action. In the rush discussion, I've always noticed in team games how vulnerable both sides are to a potential rush and wondered why more people don't rush. After a week of team games, I think I've found the answer:

GLORY

When you rush, even if you do it stupendously and completely wipe out the victim, you'll be miles behind the rest of the players. You could be the world's greatest player, but in this game, after rushing, you'll be relegated to a bit part in the larger battles to come. You'll also be vulnerable to raiding by the victim's allies. Your economy will be more fragile at this point and be more vulnerable than anyone else's. As a natural raiding target, you may end up falling even further behind economically. So even if you are successful and force the game into a 3on2 mop up, will anyone remember the early sacrifices you made on the altar of team cooperation? Not a chance. You'll have a smaller economy, your troop strength will be the lowest, and your total score will be smaller than everyone else's on your team. You'll be the n00b. Which is probably one reason why "only n00bs rush." Or at least why people say that. Rushers always turn out to have lower scores at the end of the game.

On the other hand, "look at how good so-and-so is! Man, their score was really huge. And did you see how quickly he got to the info age? He must be an expert!" Players want the glory of having the high score, of having the big econ, and using the nukes. Few are willing to step up and take one for the team, even if it gives the team an overall much better chance of winning.
posted by Tim at 7:56 PM