file Handling Infinite-Loop Conflicts Between Players

25 Sep 2023 19:09 - 25 Sep 2023 19:17 #109420 by Killiam
I feel like this issue has been addressed before, but I don't remember how and my searches aren't yielding answers. I think maybe consensus was to call a judge, but speaking as someone who sometimes judges tourneys, I'd like some guidance from the rules team.

Given card mechanics, it is possible for two players to get into a locked infinite-loop state, such that breaking the loop would require one player to relent and allow an outcome that is dispreferred for their game state. It also could be the case that if one player is ahead on victory points, they might like for the loop to continue until the game goes to time, or perhaps a player would be willing to relent only after, say, 45 minutes have passed so they have time to lunge right before the game times out... YECH.

Here is an example case, to help the discussion and clarify questions:

Player A controls Henry Taylor, who has a Protean skill card granting him superior PRO. Player B, who is A's predator, controls a magaji with No Secrets from the Magaji. During A's minion phase, Henry is empty and untapped, so Henry is in a must-hunt state. A is holding two copies of Earth Meld in-hand. Henry hunts.

B's magaji blocks, combat ensues. Wishing to avoid being torporized, A plays Earth Meld at superior. He does not wish to play it at basic and end up with Henry locked and empty; his intention is to unlock and hunt again because it is vital to his game state that Henry end up with a blood here (perhaps he is holding a reaction card with an unlock effect that costs a blood, and needs Henry to continue serving as a one-man wall so that he is not ousted.) B is holding no reaction or combat cards, so combat ends, Henry unlocks, he places the Earth Meld that he just played on the top of his library and now must hunt again. B has no reason not to block again -- in fact, it's vital to her game that she block, because Henry has proven to be an effective one-man wall, and if he remains operational, B has no path to victory. B blocks, A plays his other copy of Earth Meld at superior, redrawing the previous copy he put on his library, Henry's ability is put to use again, Henry must hunt again, B's magaji blocks again, rinse, repeat.

Let's further stipulate that if either player relents in any fashion that could end the cycle, their chance to win becomes completely untenable, such that it would be against the play-to-win rule for A to choose not to play superior Earth Melds and recycle them every time, or for B not to block with her magaji with every single hunt attempt. Conversely, let's assume that if either player does get the other to relent, their game state will be so strong that their path to victory is nearly assured.

It would seem to me that the two players have entered a locked state with an infinite loop, and it would violate the play-to-win rule for either to end the loop. It seems that the only path forward here (barring interference/cooperation from other players) is to let the game time out, even if there is still an hour remaining in the game. Worse yet, it could be one of those no-time-limit tournament finals I've been hearing about.

QUESTIONS: "How should a judge rule on this situation? Should they allow the game to go to time without breaking the loop? Is there a ruling that allows us to determine what constitutes the beginning of the loop, given a perfectly-repeating game state, such that after a certain number of loops the next player decision must vary?"

Card text pasted below.

Thanks much,
-Billy / Killiam

Name: Henry Taylor
Cardtype: Vampire
Clan: Brujah antitribu
Group: 3
Capacity: 6
Discipline: cel pre pro POT
Sabbat: After an action, you may move a combat card Henry played during that action from your ash heap to the top of your library.

Name: No Secrets From the Magaji
Cardtype: Action
+1 stealth action. Requires a ready magaji.
Put this card on this magaji and unlock him or her. The magaji with this card gets +1 intercept when attempting to block vampires. If this magaji is locked, he or she may attempt to block a vampire as if unlocked. Burn this card if this magaji attempts to block a vampire but is not successful. A vampire may have only one No Secrets From the Magaji.

-Killiam
(Bill Troxel)
"I look back from where I'm from
Look at the woman I've become
And the strangest things seem
Suddenly routine"
-Hedwig Robinson
Last edit: 25 Sep 2023 19:17 by Killiam. Reason: Edit: typo/grammar fix from "and" to "a" in first sentence of paragraph preceding the QUESTIONS.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Sep 2023 20:02 #109421 by kschaefer
You're looking for tournament rules, which handle this case.
www.vekn.net/tournament-rules/4-tournament-game-rules section 4.9 Infinite Loops.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Killiam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Sep 2023 20:05 #109422 by Ankha

I feel like this issue has been addressed before, but I don't remember how and my searches aren't yielding answers. I think maybe consensus was to call a judge, but speaking as someone who sometimes judges tourneys, I'd like some guidance from the rules team.

Given card mechanics, it is possible for two players to get into a locked infinite-loop state, such that breaking the loop would require one player to relent and allow an outcome that is dispreferred for their game state. It also could be the case that if one player is ahead on victory points, they might like for the loop to continue until the game goes to time, or perhaps a player would be willing to relent only after, say, 45 minutes have passed so they have time to lunge right before the game times out... YECH.

Here is an example case, to help the discussion and clarify questions:

Player A controls Henry Taylor, who has a Protean skill card granting him superior PRO. Player B, who is A's predator, controls a magaji with No Secrets from the Magaji. During A's minion phase, Henry is empty and untapped, so Henry is in a must-hunt state. A is holding two copies of Earth Meld in-hand. Henry hunts.

B's magaji blocks, combat ensues. Wishing to avoid being torporized, A plays Earth Meld at superior. He does not wish to play it at basic and end up with Henry locked and empty; his intention is to unlock and hunt again because it is vital to his game state that Henry end up with a blood here (perhaps he is holding a reaction card with an unlock effect that costs a blood, and needs Henry to continue serving as a one-man wall so that he is not ousted.) B is holding no reaction or combat cards, so combat ends, Henry unlocks, he places the Earth Meld that he just played on the top of his library and now must hunt again. B has no reason not to block again -- in fact, it's vital to her game that she block, because Henry has proven to be an effective one-man wall, and if he remains operational, B has no path to victory. B blocks, A plays his other copy of Earth Meld at superior, redrawing the previous copy he put on his library, Henry's ability is put to use again, Henry must hunt again, B's magaji blocks again, rinse, repeat.

Let's further stipulate that if either player relents in any fashion that could end the cycle, their chance to win becomes completely untenable, such that it would be against the play-to-win rule for A to choose not to play superior Earth Melds and recycle them every time, or for B not to block with her magaji with every single hunt attempt. Conversely, let's assume that if either player does get the other to relent, their game state will be so strong that their path to victory is nearly assured.

It would seem to me that the two players have entered a locked state with an infinite loop, and it would violate the play-to-win rule for either to end the loop. It seems that the only path forward here (barring interference/cooperation from other players) is to let the game time out, even if there is still an hour remaining in the game. Worse yet, it could be one of those no-time-limit tournament finals I've been hearing about.

QUESTIONS: "How should a judge rule on this situation? Should they allow the game to go to time without breaking the loop? Is there a ruling that allows us to determine what constitutes the beginning of the loop, given a perfectly-repeating game state, such that after a certain number of loops the next player decision must vary?"


This has already been addressed: the loop ends in the last state it has before starting again.
In this case, Henry Taylor is unlocked, empty, and cannot hunt anymore this way anymore.

groups.google.com/g/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/c/2pgKcLWiqMo/m/b8ipgBwZVpUJ

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
The following user(s) said Thank You: Killiam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.068 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum