Could you give an example by comparing your idea with a chess game?

When you only know how to play with one piece alone, you might reach to an 'even' situation with an enemy. Then, you should use another piece to help your main piece. That might be the incentive...

The goal is always to win the game, but you should have stronger goals related with their inminence: reach the middle of the field, get free from your threats, increase your power, widen your alternatives, etc. When you are close to loosing the game, your goals are only the inminent ones. And very few: survive! You should always be able to sort those goals and re-evaluate their benefits. These should redefine your strategies...

If every helping piece could move freely with its own goal, then your sorting might be also full of namespaces, and more complex... So, it is always better to cooperate with your enemy and leave him move freely without reaching to a 'static' or 'even' situation.

Do these make any sense? If so, I am glad to have helped you.