About deals and withdrawing
25 Jan 2013 09:19 - 25 Jan 2013 09:20 #44383
by Ankha
About deals and withdrawing was created by Ankha
I'm a bit tired of explaining over and over during games how a deal based on withdrawal can be achieved, so I'll do it here.
First of all, it's not dirty doing that. The goal of the game being to have the GW or at least score the more VPs as possible, agreeing to deal with someone in order to get more VP than you could expect by not dealing with him is in the spirit of the game.
We'll keep in mind that the tournament rules state that once in duel, all deals are void and players must try to score the more VP possible. The rule also state that once you have the GW, you're free to dispose of the remaining VPs. Finally, if you're in duel but unable to do anything without dying, you maximize your VP by letting the other player withdraw.
Let's have an example. Game is A > B > C > D > E.
At some point, B and E oust their preys, leaving B, D and E in the game. D is going to be ousted by B, and has no reasonable chance of killing E.
D can still get a VP by getting B ousted, then letting E withdraw.
How is that possible when deals are void in duel?
Many players don't grasp the concept that even when the deals are void, the rules force you to play in order to maximize your points. Sometimes maximizing points mean being clever and withdraw or let the other player withdraw.
This can only be done if either player gets the GW, and if the player getting the GW agrees to leave some points to the other player.
Suppose D and E have a deal where D spends his resources resisting to B while E ousts B.
Once in duel, D and E's deal is void. But D still has no reasonable change of ousting E (perhaps even less since E got 6 pool).
E has 2 vp. By withdrawing or letting D withdraw, or reaching the time limit, E has the GW.
Option 1
E can torporize/paralyze all of D's minion
That case is simple. Once D has no minion left, he can't stop E from withdrawing. E scores GW 2.5, D scores 1 VP
Option 2
D is at 1 pool, E can oust D anytime (E plays stealth, D has no intercept).
This case is tricky because it's based on what E could do. But if D has 99.9% chances of being ousted if he takes any offensive action against E, D maximizes his victory points by withdrawing, or letting E withdraw.
Option 3
D has no reasonable chances of ousting E, but those chances are much greater if E empties his library in order to attempt to withdraw
In that case, E will ask D to withdraw (otherwise, E will just oust D). D gets 0.5 VP which is better than 0.
Option 4
There's not enough time left for D to oust E.
If E attempts to withdraw and succeeds, D will get 1 VP instead of 0.5 for time limit. D can let E withdraw.
Duels can and should be prepared while there's still a third player on the table and while the deals are still legal.
The idea is that once only 2 players are left in the game, one of them have no other option than withdrawing in order to maximize his VPs while the other gets the GW.
First of all, it's not dirty doing that. The goal of the game being to have the GW or at least score the more VPs as possible, agreeing to deal with someone in order to get more VP than you could expect by not dealing with him is in the spirit of the game.
We'll keep in mind that the tournament rules state that once in duel, all deals are void and players must try to score the more VP possible. The rule also state that once you have the GW, you're free to dispose of the remaining VPs. Finally, if you're in duel but unable to do anything without dying, you maximize your VP by letting the other player withdraw.
Let's have an example. Game is A > B > C > D > E.
At some point, B and E oust their preys, leaving B, D and E in the game. D is going to be ousted by B, and has no reasonable chance of killing E.
D can still get a VP by getting B ousted, then letting E withdraw.
How is that possible when deals are void in duel?
Many players don't grasp the concept that even when the deals are void, the rules force you to play in order to maximize your points. Sometimes maximizing points mean being clever and withdraw or let the other player withdraw.
This can only be done if either player gets the GW, and if the player getting the GW agrees to leave some points to the other player.
Suppose D and E have a deal where D spends his resources resisting to B while E ousts B.
Once in duel, D and E's deal is void. But D still has no reasonable change of ousting E (perhaps even less since E got 6 pool).
E has 2 vp. By withdrawing or letting D withdraw, or reaching the time limit, E has the GW.
Option 1
E can torporize/paralyze all of D's minion
That case is simple. Once D has no minion left, he can't stop E from withdrawing. E scores GW 2.5, D scores 1 VP
Option 2
D is at 1 pool, E can oust D anytime (E plays stealth, D has no intercept).
This case is tricky because it's based on what E could do. But if D has 99.9% chances of being ousted if he takes any offensive action against E, D maximizes his victory points by withdrawing, or letting E withdraw.
Option 3
D has no reasonable chances of ousting E, but those chances are much greater if E empties his library in order to attempt to withdraw
In that case, E will ask D to withdraw (otherwise, E will just oust D). D gets 0.5 VP which is better than 0.
Option 4
There's not enough time left for D to oust E.
If E attempts to withdraw and succeeds, D will get 1 VP instead of 0.5 for time limit. D can let E withdraw.
Duels can and should be prepared while there's still a third player on the table and while the deals are still legal.
The idea is that once only 2 players are left in the game, one of them have no other option than withdrawing in order to maximize his VPs while the other gets the GW.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
25 Jan 2013 10:30 #44388
by Reyda
Ok.
Imagine V:tes as a sports tournament.
" - I will sit there looking at you while you score your points. Oh, and if you can make a small move, like scoring against yourself, just so i have one point, it would be cool".
- Excuse me referee, why are those people not really fighting ?
- But no sir, rest assured that they are playing by the rules !"
Please tell me how the rules are different in vtes. Please tell me about sportsmanship. Please tell me that letting another player win is "maximizing" anything, really.
You don't see me in tournaments ? But why, I'd love to sit there while other players are splitting the table on the basis one of them has a completely useless deck
Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier
Replied by Reyda on topic Re: About deals and withdrawing
First of all, it's not dirty doing that. The goal of the game being to have the GW or at least score the more VPs as possible, agreeing to deal with someone in order to get more VP than you could expect by not dealing with him is in the spirit of the game.
Ok.
Imagine V:tes as a sports tournament.
" - I will sit there looking at you while you score your points. Oh, and if you can make a small move, like scoring against yourself, just so i have one point, it would be cool".
- Excuse me referee, why are those people not really fighting ?
- But no sir, rest assured that they are playing by the rules !"
Please tell me how the rules are different in vtes. Please tell me about sportsmanship. Please tell me that letting another player win is "maximizing" anything, really.
You don't see me in tournaments ? But why, I'd love to sit there while other players are splitting the table on the basis one of them has a completely useless deck
Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
25 Jan 2013 10:35 - 25 Jan 2013 10:35 #44389
by Ohlmann
Problem is, I don't see the relation between what you say and what Ankha say. That Ankha say something is possible and allowed does not mean that something else -in another sport, no less- is also possible and allowed
Replied by Ohlmann on topic Re: About deals and withdrawing
Ok.
Imagine V:tes as a sports tournament.
" - I will sit there looking at you while you score your points. Oh, and if you can make a small move, like scoring against yourself, just so i have one point, it would be cool".
- Excuse me referee, why are those people not really fighting ?
- But no sir, rest assured that they are playing by the rules !"
Please tell me how the rules are different in vtes. Please tell me about sportsmanship. Please tell me that letting another player win is "maximizing" anything, really.
Problem is, I don't see the relation between what you say and what Ankha say. That Ankha say something is possible and allowed does not mean that something else -in another sport, no less- is also possible and allowed
And you see people making deal with useless decks ? In the world where I play, people deals with other player that can actually contribute to their victory.You don't see me in tournaments ? But why, I'd love to sit there while other players are splitting the table on the basis one of them has a completely useless deck
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
25 Jan 2013 10:59 #44390
by Reyda
Most of the time people make losing deals because they can't handle another deck. Like in "ok, i know you could bleed me out, so let's split the table". Or "If you rush me I am dead, so please let me have 1 or 2 VP, I give you the table".
Their inability to face a threat or build a deck with sufficient defense leads to kingmaking.
PEOPLE Y U NO MAKE BALANCED DECKS ?
But sure it's better to stuff your deck with 8 Parity, 10 Zillah, mass obfuscate and tell yourself that if there is combat around, you can still have 2 VP by dealing your way out. I think it hurts Vtes, but hey, it's just one random guy's opinion B-)
Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier
Replied by Reyda on topic Re: About deals and withdrawing
name me a game where king making or playing to lose is recommended and kindly viewed by the judges ?That Ankha say something is possible and allowed does not mean that something else -in another sport, no less- is also possible and allowed
I think you are lying a bit.And you see people making deal with useless decks ? In the world where I play, people deals with other player that can actually contribute to their victory.
Most of the time people make losing deals because they can't handle another deck. Like in "ok, i know you could bleed me out, so let's split the table". Or "If you rush me I am dead, so please let me have 1 or 2 VP, I give you the table".
Their inability to face a threat or build a deck with sufficient defense leads to kingmaking.
PEOPLE Y U NO MAKE BALANCED DECKS ?
But sure it's better to stuff your deck with 8 Parity, 10 Zillah, mass obfuscate and tell yourself that if there is combat around, you can still have 2 VP by dealing your way out. I think it hurts Vtes, but hey, it's just one random guy's opinion B-)
Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.097 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Card Balance & Strategy Discussion
- About deals and withdrawing