Posts from Round table Auto-translated

...So, it turns out that Craig doesn't want to attack first, and Tunar doesn't want to attack first either – they both stand there and wait for half an hour :D. The gauntlets prevent escape or buying their way out.
Now the question is: is this a stalemate where no one wants to attack, or should Craig attack first and lose? :smile45:

I'm curious: does anyone here actually look at the rules from time to time?

The rules state: If a stalemate situation occurs in battle, the attacking player must retreat. For example: the attacker has 100 dwarves left in the battle, and the defending hero has 1 fly. And the 100 dwarves cannot catch the fly. In this case, the attacker with 100 dwarves must retreat (or pay a bribe). If someone is wearing "War Shackles," you need to load the last save, repeat all the moves exactly as they were made before this battle, and disband the troops that were killed during this battle. Then, the player(s) wearing the shackles must remove them, the attacker must attack again, and then retreat/pay a bribe.

But in my situation, everyone is catching up to everyone else, but no one wants to attack first :D I think the rules should include my situation as an example of a stalemate because both I and my opponent searched the rules for this specific situation and couldn't find it...

... If a stalemate situation occurs in battle, the attacking player must retreat.

A slight mass degradation :) The clarification in the rules is written for the situation when the attacking player (even with a significant advantage in HP) cannot catch the defending unit on the battlefield – therefore, they must run away/bribe their way out. There is nothing similar here. The attacking player is obliged to attack until someone is completely destroyed.

You have a stalemate in battle – what should the attacking player do?
The rules provide an example of the most common situation leading to a stalemate, but this does not mean that it fully covers the list of situations in which this rule should be used. Sometimes, examples are given in the form of a battle between 1 troll and 1 troll, or 1 ghost against 1 ghost. That is, the problem is not in the lack of knowledge of the Season rules, but in the lack of knowledge of the laws of elementary logic.:confused:

Who and when made this mandatory? Please provide the rule.

the law is on the side of the defender

the attacker... must attack!

...
now the question is: is this a stalemate where no one wants to attack, or should Kreg attack first and lose? :smile45:

You forgot to add "in my humble opinion" or a quote from the rules that places a corresponding obligation on the attacker.

scorpthe attacker ... must attack!

a counter-question: when was someone's desire a condition for a stalemate?

the defender owes nothing to anyone - they have to accept that they have been attacked

so you are claiming that if the attacker has the opportunity to attack but doesn't want to, that's a stalemate?

In chess, a stalemate implies an impossibility to make a move, i.e., the scenario with dwarves and a fly is also not a stalemate in the literal sense. I think that's why the rules don't refer to a stalemate situation, but rather to a "stalemate," i.e., any situation in which the battle cannot be ended.

Yes, that's its difficult fate. But what does this imply?

I believe that if both do not want to fight, then it is a stalemate situation.

A counter-question: when was someone's desire a condition for stalemate situations?
Impossibility is the condition (it is impossible to catch up, it is impossible to kill).

If you are in a stalemate situation in battle, what should the attacking player do?
The rules provide an example of the most common situation leading to a stalemate, but this does not mean that it fully covers the list of situations in which this rule should be applied. Sometimes, examples are given in the form of a battle between 1 troll and 1 troll, or 1 ghost against 1 ghost. That is, the problem is not in the lack of knowledge of the Season rules, but in the lack of knowledge of the laws of elementary logic: confused:

Added 7 minutes ago
Who and when made it mandatory? Please provide the rule.

the laws of elementary logic

If the battle ends in a draw, then the ATTACKING player must surrender or run away

P.S. In fact, we have a situation in which both players act in full accordance with the rules, but the battle cannot be completed. I believe that such a situation can be called a "stalemate" for the same reason as in the example with gnomes and a fly.

players must ... respect each other