"only XL-4"

Al Feyn, in this case, sorry, but you are wrong. Good roads on XL are often much more important than 3 cons at respawn, this is not Jebus Cross for you.

Actually, my main point was in the parentheses. The first line is emotions, "warming up". The logic in parentheses — where am I wrong there?

I understand the idea of 6LM where you can retreat from the starting zone and generally "run away". That's not bad, it's strategic. But with these dead-end roads leading out of a one-way passage, I consider this template (AT THIS SPECIFIC MOMENT, IN THIS SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION) to be garbage. It's sad, but I don't like in a strategy game the option from the start — "you lost because random decided so" (ok, let's double-check — are you ATG and playing against Kilgor? no? then yes, you lost).
(This is a reference to one of the most amazing games I've seen (and streamed/commentated ATG's game), when at the beginning of the 2nd week ATG was scraping by on his respawn with the same kind of surrender, while Kilgor had something like 9-10 towns. ATG won.)
I always veto this template. And the main point was that if you play this template, then either you must be morally/mentally/whatever ready for such a road. Or why are you playing it and then showing — darn, unlucky with the roads?
So where am I wrong here?