times Transfer himself to death

29 Aug 2011 09:46 #9229 by fojtik
Player A - Animal combat with a lot of masters, Nana Buruku, Enkidu, Nangila a Talbot were out. All have about 2 bloods. 25 pools

Player B - everything in torpor, 6 pools

Player C - Salubri Antitribu rush with Weighted Walking Sticks, one vampire with stick, vessel and one blood. Have superior fortitude and valorean (i thing). About three pools.

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

More
29 Aug 2011 09:54 #9230 by fojtik

For player C was situation really unpleasant. Player A have 4 vampires. 3 of them have permanent rush ability. There was a lot of time, no chance for time limit. But still have one ready vampire.

If you acknowledge that C cannot oust you and cannot hope for a time limit, then it is clear: C may self-oust. How many minions and pool he has is irrelevant.


So there is question if C really have no chance to oust me. I agree that chance was extrremely low. He needs a lot of untaps, and prevents. And player A should have no Carrion crows or Aids from Bats. But IMHO there was a chance.

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

More
29 Aug 2011 10:00 - 29 Aug 2011 10:01 #9231 by Pendargon
Player A has Enkidu, so even without bats+crows player C is in tough spot, not to mention that it feels that player A was playing Girls with aids version like Hugh did, in that case, player A is one golconda away from additional 10+ pool.

In this case, self-oust is, I feel , completely in order, as it ensures that player C gets most points (realistically, c'mon), and NOBODY else gets more points than him.

Again, difficult to say, without actually watching the game itself.

:QUI: :POT: :OBE: :CEL: :OBF: :tore: :assa:
Last edit: 29 Aug 2011 10:01 by Pendargon.

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

More
29 Aug 2011 10:08 #9232 by fojtik
Yes, player player A was playing Girls with aids. Player C was in very bad situation. But he still have one ready minion and his deck takes him theoretical chance to block all player A minions and kill them. I agree that it was theoretical chance and there was low probability to do it. Is it enought for player C to oust himself?

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

More
29 Aug 2011 10:23 #9233 by Suoli
Replied by Suoli on topic Re: Transfer himself to death

Yes, player player A was playing Girls with aids. Player C was in very bad situation. But he still have one ready minion and his deck takes him theoretical chance to block all player A minions and kill them. I agree that it was theoretical chance and there was low probability to do it. Is it enought for player C to oust himself?


An official guideline might be in order. Does "reasonable chance" mean
a) a purely theoretical chance, as in some other player on the table has to play some very unlikely sequence of cards that are uncharacteristic to his deck,
b) a very small chance, as in you have to top deck 1-3 times in a row or
c) you're playing Legacy of Pander and your prey is playing AUS-weenie?

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

More
29 Aug 2011 11:44 - 29 Aug 2011 11:45 #9239 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Transfer himself to death

I agree that it was theoretical chance and there was low probability to do it. Is it enought for player C to oust himself?

Theorically, by self ousting, player C may force player A to Life Boon him (A hopes to save his Game Win) with some much pool C may oust A. There is a low probability, but it exists too.
Between both two low and nearly equal probabilities, C may choose one or another.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 29 Aug 2011 11:45 by Ankha.

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.060 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum