What is the author's main intent in "The Most Dangerous Game?"

I was unable to find an interview or authorial statement
that clearly spelled out Richard Connell's intent in writing "The Most Dangerous Game,"
so I will answer based on my interpretation.

It seems that
the intent behind "The Most Dangerous Game" can be broadly separated into two
catagories: to create a story of suspense that thrilled his audience; to explore the
morality of hunting animals by comparing it to hunting
humans.

The first point is clear in the story itself; it
is, in fact, a thrilling story of suspense. For almost one hundred years, the story has
influenced writers in film and print, and is still taught and read as a classic
today.

The second is subtext in the story; while the author
never digresses into a didactic monologue about the morality of hunting, the comparison
of Rainsford and General Zaroff shows a clear question as to the morality of hunting as
a sport rather than as a necessity of survival. Zaroff is bored with hunting animals (an
accepted practice) and so he hunts humans (a condemned practice). Rainsford is of normal
society, but he quickly puts aside his ethics and hunts Zaroff as a method of survival;
Zaroff considers his actions acceptable although they would result in his own death, if
they were successful. By the end, when Rainsford makes a conscious decision to kill
Zaroff rather than attempt a hidden escape, it is unclear whether he has embraced
Zaroff's philosophy, or killed Zaroff to stifle it forever.