file Play to win, duel and 3-2 split

25 Jun 2012 06:43 - 25 Jun 2012 06:44 #32492 by Ankha
Hi,

Considering players A > B > C > D > E.
D thinks he's about to lose and also won't be able to oust player E.
D proposes to help E killing A, B and C (giving E 3 VP and the GW) and that in the duel, E leaves D the remaining 2 VP.

Considering that the deal becomes void during the duel but that when the duel begins, E already has the GW, is it legal for E to leave D the remaining 2 VP (without violating the PTW rule).

4.8. Play to Win

One aspect of sportsmanlike conduct is that players must not play toward goals that conflict with the goal of the game as stated in the V:TES rulebook (e.g., attacking certain players on the basis of their V:EKN ratings or overall tournament standing, etc.). For tournaments, playing to win means playing to get a Game Win if it is reasonably possible, and when a Game Win is not reasonably possible, then playing to get as many Victory Points as possible.
Neither the basic game rules nor the tournament rules enforce or regulate deals made between players. The tournament rules acknowledge deals, however, in that a deal which represents the best interests of the players involved at the time the deal is made is allowed to be honored, even when the normal play to win rule would indicate that a deal should be broken. This only applies to deal that are in the best interests of the players involved at the time the deal is made. That is, it applies only when making the deal is playing to win. (It is also allowable to break such a deal, of course).
During the finals, playing to win means playing to finish as tournament winner (as defined in 3.7.5).
Exception: when only two Methuselahs remain, the tournament rules no longer acknowledge any deals. Prior deals are voided, even if they were play to win when made. When only two Methuselahs remain, both Methuselahs must play to win based only on game state, without regard to any deals.


Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 25 Jun 2012 06:44 by Ankha.

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

More
25 Jun 2012 07:56 #32494 by Oskar
Yes, it is legal. The first highlighted part explains it - that PTW is only defined to play for the game win in this scenario. So E who already has the game win secured can do whatever he wants, D however must still play to get as many VP:s as possible and could not voluntarily give E a table sweep even if he wanted.

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

More
25 Jun 2012 08:36 #32495 by Pascal Bertrand

Hi,

Considering players A > B > C > D > E.
D thinks he's about to lose and also won't be able to oust player E.
D proposes to help E killing A, B and C (giving E 3 VP and the GW) and that in the duel, E leaves D the remaining 2 VP.

Considering that the deal becomes void during the duel but that when the duel begins, E already has the GW, is it legal for E to leave D the remaining 2 VP (without violating the PTW rule).


Yes - and this doesn't violate the PTW rule. PTW is about getting the GW when possible. When you have it, then PTW doesn't require that you sweep the table.
Also notice: the previous deal (where E would give D 2 VPs) is completely moot here. With or without that deal, E can remove themself from the game when E has the GW.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ankha

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

More
25 Jun 2012 10:16 #32501 by mondragon
Is legal, but you must be careful, I am thinking that:

IF D minds changes (while the game changes)and he thinks that he is able to win in any moment he MUST break the deal and try to win.


sorry about my english, I hope you can understand that

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

More
25 Jun 2012 10:27 #32503 by Pascal Bertrand

Is legal, but you must be careful, I am thinking that:

IF D minds changes (while the game changes)and he thinks that he is able to win in any moment he MUST break the deal and try to win.


sorry about my english, I hope you can understand that

Wrong.
If D's mind changes and D thinks he is now able to get the GW, he CAN break the deal. He also may decide not to break the deal, and this would still be respecting the PTW rule.

The tournament rules acknowledge deals, however, in that a deal which represents the best interests of the players involved at the time the deal is made is allowed to be honored, even when the normal play to win rule would indicate that a deal should be broken.

The following user(s) said Thank You: mondragon

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

More
25 Jun 2012 10:30 #32504 by Ankha

IF D minds changes (while the game changes)and he thinks that he is able to win in any moment he MUST break the deal and try to win.

Only in a 2-players game (that's why we say the deal is void from that point).
Otherwise, no rule enforces D to break the deal as long there's at least 3 players left in the game; and D may choose to break his deal anytime of course.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.190 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum