The concept of Draw

Gluecksritter · User Joined: 19 May 2003 Posts: 38 Location: Dortmund

I agree with everything you say here, Leto. Only one claim seems to be quite bold in my eyes:

jackbauer · User Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 36

Once the advancing blue miners meet up with red's seargants, then the spy would do all of blue's moves in his own end, waiting for red to either move left-right-back or forth. As long as the pieces are spread out, the rule of 5's or the 3 squares rule would force red to switch to another piece to begin a rule of 5's or a 3 squares move. As long as red can rotate the piece and start anew, this game would never end, except in the unmentioned case where red does not know which of the 4 pieces of blue is the spy, and being bluffed into thinking the spy is a miner, would leave an open freeway to the flag from one of the 3 lanes. It all is determined by leto's "blocking" scenario. If the lanes are blocked then the game would be a draw. If the pieces were did not meet up until completely within red's 40 squares, then it still could be a draw if there was no clear freeway to the flag. Of course if the bluff was a bad one, and the spy was taken but the seargent remained in an advantageous defensive position, then the game would never end in a blue victory, but a draw of course.
It all depends on who moves next, once the 6 pieces are adjacent.
Of course blue could back up to its own end, but that while not cowardly, is dimwitted and serves no purpose but to prolong the need for a draw.
My guess is the random placing of the pieces of Glue's offer, would determine the outcome, and a successful spy bluff, especially one that causes 2 seargents to trap it , causing 1 seargent to defend 3 miners for a short time. But for red not to trap means he is conceding a draw in any case.