Was I a jerk not to Vote to End this far into the game when my opponent had to leave?

http://WarLight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?GameID=2885609

I don't see where that game was decided at all for either side. I agree with his initial statement of it being a long game.

My opinion is that not voting to end is jerkish unless it's very clear you're going to win, e.g. if you have double the opponents team. Of course, you had better chances, but not dramatically better chances.

Nope. he created the game he knew the commitment needed to finish that size of a game. if he had to leave then that was on him. he should never have started a game he could not finish.

dotdot looked like could have won it but u should only vte when some in booted n the first 9 turns or before game gets serious only when they are booted.

I didn't weigh in on the vote issue because I don't play real time and don't really know what the unwritten rules are. But as I said the game was far from over. Without multi-attack that game was going to take forever, why would anybody even play US big real time without multi?

Ill always vote to end. Though I dont play real time and dont care about my stats, so I might not be objective.

Neither of you had a better chance at that point.

While you had better position, dotdotdot had more momentum going and less troops dead. Basically, you were gambling that you could outexpand dotdotdot and he would be too cautious to keep momentum going.

it wasnt clear who was going to win
unless i am obviously going to win i pretty much always vote

sorry but why would someone have so much time to play 1v1 on a big USA map :P

If Seasonal Ladder force finish rules were applied, you clearly would have lost here:

Income x 2 + number of armies controlled

320*2 + 1360 = 2000
318*2 + 819 = 1455

However, as others already pointed out it is impossible to tell who would have won in the end. You were both well inside each others bonuses, preventing the other from completing his meta bonuses. dotdotdot clearly had the momentum though, judging by his army surplus I'd say his chances were significantly higher than yours.

For the sake of argument let's scale down all numbers by 10 and imagine this was a 1v1 on medium earth:
Both players get 32 per turn, one player is 54 armies ahead (= almost 2 turns worth of income). I think in that case everyone would have called you a jerk for not voting to end ;-)

I once did a large FFA real-time on USA Big. It takes about three hours, depending on how many boots there took place.