From: shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham)
Subject: Re: Titan rules addenda/errata
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 23:23:38 GMT

In article <1hqff6INNfte@life.ai.mit.edu> joltman@cookie-crisp.ai.mit.edu (T. Andy Frakes) writes:
>In article <1hnotkINNkv7@uwm.edu>, bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III) writes:
>|> From article <1992Dec28.202726.7062@athena.mit.edu>, by cwk@athena.mit.edu (Chuck Krueger):
>|> ] In article <sfD57kW00VB6Q7bEgF@andrew.cmu.edu> jdr@andrew.cmu.edu writes:
>|> ]>	Titan rules say that you can make deals in order to speed up the game. 
>|> ]>You may agree to any result except a defender time-out (I don't know why
>|> ]>there is this exception.  These are normally the slowest battles.)
>|> ] 
>|> ] Hmm... Seems to me that if my opponent and I want to agree to a time-out 
>|> ] result we can just put our pieces on the battleboard, out of contact and do
>|> ] nothing.
>|> ] 
>|>Remember when making deals that require putting pieces on the board that they
>|>are not binding so there is the possibility of a double cross.
>
>Right.  This shouldn't be much of a problem in friendly, leisurely games, but
>it would be something to watch for in a tournament.  I'm still not sure where
>the rules allow for a 'mutual,' though  I'm sure that the other players may
>object to such an event in cases where the the attacker and/or defender are
>sucking for stack markers and the result cannot be achieved reliably through
>normal play (as can deals with particular pieces or time losses).  Any help 

A good point. In fact, a strategy I sometimes use when I find I attacked more
than I planed on (giving cooperative terrain), and giving away points is
very relevent, is to play for a time-out. I, the attacker, set up a defensive
formation to discourge combat and then allow the combat phases to pass,
perhaps exchanging a few rangestrikes. Then, on the 6th or 7th phase I send
one creature to a place where it cannot be engaged (or at least cannot be
killed) and everyone else to fight - and try and strip the defender's stack.
(I once summoned an angel in on the _7th_ phase to help finish off a Dragon)
While I lose a stack that I was going to lose anyhow, the defender never gets
any points AND loses some creatures.

This strategy could devestate an opponent who believes me if I were to say
"hey, just wait there and I will give you a time victory". He will get the
promissed time victory, but with a smaller stack than he thought. I can never
forget the face of an opponent - who never seen this play before - after his
7-stack (titan) set up defensively in the Swamp waiting for my (weaker)
attacking 6-stack to try to break his formation before he will get a Wyvern
for Wyvern on phase 4. When my stack set up defensively as well and sufficed
itself with rangestrikes (2 Rangers), he was sure of victory. By phase 4 he
was denied the recruit because his stack still had 7 creatures (he did not
want to sacrifice one and allow my Angel in, figuring he will get his recruit
after the battle). When I attacked all out on phase 6, and reduced his stack
to a mere Titan and two Rangers, he figured that at least he would get an
Angel and an Archangle (making for a rather nasty 5-stack teleporter). Well,
he was quite discussted when I pointed out that I still had a GARGOYLE (out
of reach) at the end of phase 7 - TIME LOSS, no points, no angle, no Archangel,
no teleportation. OUCH.


BTW, as for agreeing to a mutual: since players can agree on the losses that
will be incurred in a battle (instead of fighting it), simply agreeing that
ALL creatures would be lost constitutes a mutual.


Dan Shoham               shoham@ll.mit.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The view presented are not necessarily those of my employer, etc.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
Lexington Massachusetts, 02173-9108
Office B-373
617-981-3515
------------------------------------------------------------------------