About deals and withdrawing
Sp grow up, grow a pair and suck on a lemon, or get some basic manners for crying out loud.
Considering you wrote "Always remember who dealbroke, and make them pay, that way less people will dealbreak you." which clearly means you would encourage a non-PTW-style of playing does not really go well with the attitude of encouraging people to grow up. Either play according to the rules or don't play at all.
Note: I'm not calling you an idiot, I have no idea of how you are as a person whatsoever. I do, however, find the vengence perspective insulting to those who play to win. Regardless of what you think of deals and whether playing for a GW should be the only goal in a game (as opposed to GW, or maximizing VP if GW is not an option), playing to get revenge is not an option.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
And yet you keep talking to me.I just about had it with...
And yet, I have never threatened anyone with violence, as you just did. In fact, I've never heard of such a threat of violence in VTES, online or in-person, ever.If you made that remark to me live you would be sucking on a soup with a straw, and trying to wank off with your feet for a couple of weeks.
Let's all remember that, shall we? If you call players who go cross-table for revenge from a previous game "fucking idiots" then Pendargon will threaten you with physical violence.
No matter how much you dislike someone, their attitude, or their philosophy, there's no reason to threaten them with physical violence.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/
Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
And yet you keep talking to me.I just about had it with...
And yet, I have never threatened anyone with violence, as you just did. In fact, I've never heard of such a threat of violence in VTES, online or in-person, ever.If you made that remark to me live you would be sucking on a soup with a straw, and trying to wank off with your feet for a couple of weeks.
Let's all remember that, shall we? If you call players who go cross-table for revenge from a previous game "fucking idiots" then Pendargon will threaten you with physical violence.
No matter how much you dislike someone, their attitude, or their philosophy, there's no reason to threaten them with physical violence.
no, i do not keep talking to you.
I responded to you when you clearly tried to divert topic instead of saying " i was outta line, i am sorry"
but no, that would not be you, now would it, mister I-am-always-right-and-everyone-else-is-always-wrong-and-i-get-to-insult-everyone. Many, MANY posters here tried to reason and talk nicely to you over the course of existance of this forums, and tried to divert your attention that your language and attitude is disgusting and deplorable. Yet you continue to plod along, not paying heed to anybody but your own selfish keyboard wanking.
So, it is my deepest belief that ONLY by explaining it to you on the most basic level would get to your head. And it appears i am succeeding in it.







Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Wedge is exactly right, which is the logical point that was being made to Ankha in the actual game that his (nearly accurate) scenario represents.
Thank you, Wedge
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Robba Yaga
-
- Offline
- Ancilla
-
- Posts: 58
- Thank you received: 22
D has two options:
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.[/b]
What kind of deal is that? D would do that anyway, right?
- getting killed by B trying (with little chance of success) to oust E. If E is weakened in the process, D is actually "king-making" player B
- agreeing with E to resist to B in exchange of a VP. D is actually "king-making" player E, but gets a VP in the process.
D is lost anyway, so any of his actions is helping either of the two winning players. D could also deal with B, but it's much harder since B must have a deck capable of back-ousting.
Because of the previous agreement. Even though all deals are void, since E has the GW he can choose to leave D 1 VP.
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
E would score 4 VP if just ousted D, so why do anything else?
D on the other must try to oust E, unless it's not possible (that's why I stated that preparing the duel is important).
Same as above.Option 2
E would score 4 VP if just ousted D, so why do anything else?
Option 3
E would score 4 VP if just ousted D, so why do anything else?
Because it's the same for him, and he may give the remaning VP to D as long as he has the GW (but this can be a little risky).
You haven't said why E is withdrawing, but O.K.Option 4
D "kingmakes" B or E anyway, so it's better for him to get a VP in the process.
Duels can and should be prepared while there's still a third player on the table and while the deals are still legal.
I am sensing the gist of this to justify, D kingmaking E over B.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Wedge wrote:
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
E would score 4 VP if just ousted D, so why do anything else?
Because of the previous agreement. Even though all deals are void, since E has the GW he can choose to leave D 1 VP.
E does NOT have the GW. E has 2 VP in a game that has 2 unresolved VP's in it. In order for E to maximize his VP's he must attempt to oust D or go to time trying. Choosing to leave D 1 VP will win him the game but is not maximizing his VP's: 4 by ousting is more than 2.5 by letting D withdraw or withdrawing himself.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Robert Scythe
-
- Offline
- Elder
-
- Posts: 147
- Thank you received: 38
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Card Balance & Strategy Discussion
- About deals and withdrawing