An Introduction by Dr Cool

Hey you Icers!

Welcome to the third Hypo rag. We here at Icehouse Games have been pretty busy with non-ice related stuff, so Hypo's been stagnating. Speaking of non-ice stuff, warm wishes for a hoopy marriage go out to Andrew and Kristin, who iced each other good by throwing a party and gettin' hitched. (Deafening Applause.)

I must confess that Andrew wrote most of the articles this time, including a discourse of "Cheeseballing", and his latest variation, Nuclear Icehouse. It's a blast. As always, Kristin did all of the layout. Isn't it nice? I am the head editor, so I didn't do any actual work.

In this issue, you'll find a fine article (by Andy, of course) about the last Icehouse Tournament we put on. Many thanks and utter respect to the incredibly tough participants for putting up with three days of hell frozen over. The article fails to.mention that after staying awake for a whole weekend, even the Doctor can lose his cool. Sad but true, folks. But, I'm OK now, after therapy (which involves lots of moty-cycling). I also have a new cool mentor, who I happened to meet at the tourny. That's right, Travillian; I mean you. I've been telepathically taking brush up courses on coolness through Trav's dreams. He probably hasn't noticed, though. The man just emanates coolness, people. Thanks for hanging in there and showing us the ropes, Trav. You are a god of cool.

As many of you already know, we got the Patent! Dude! And we'll repeat that several more times through the newsletter 'cause we're damned pleased with ourselves. Dude! We got the patent!

Four variations are introduced in this issue, including the afforementioned Nuclear staff. I don't think Haunted Icehouse has been play-tested enough; if you have any problems with it, contact us (so far, it works well). And then there's #12's house rule for walls. If we receive a favorable response from a lot of readers, we may make a change to the basic rules of Icehouse; that is, substitute the existing rule with #12's rule, since it may be easier to understand and implement. The new Kidnapping variation is fascinating to me (I'm already declaring it a house rule of my own), hope you like it too. It totally squashes stagnation.

We've stopped making handmade sets, so orders cannot be taken. Sorry. We decided to stop our small production in order to gear up for manufacturing a major run of games (5000 to be exact). Our stumbling stone at the moment is money. If anybody knows of a way to borrow $65,000, tell me, OK? We are hoping that, if we can swing a business loan (or find some other source of money), we will have professionally manufactured sets available in the summer or fall of '9 1.

Thanks for the letters, fears; I really appreciate the attention and correspondence. Stay cool.

-- Dr Cool

Dear Dr Cool,

I'm a bit confused about the role of squandered pieces in over icing. In the first picture, (c) is squandered. However, if (b) were removed, (c) would be icing (a). Does this mean that (a) is over iced? (a) would still be -iced if (b) were removed.

And what about the second picture? Now (a) is definitely over iced. Can I remove (b), or is (d) the only piece that can be captured? Again, if (b) were removed, (a) would still be iced.

- Dave Wendland

Dear Dave,

In the first picture, (c) is squandered and is therefore not participating in an attack on anything. The standing piece is not over iced, and nothing can be captured.

The second diagram is similar, if slightly more complicated. The main point to remember in any potential over ice situation is this: A piece is over iced when the attack force is so redundant that one or more of the participating attack pieces are not needed to ice the standing piece. Only pay attention to the participating attack pieces. In this particular case, ignore (c) completely. Now the situation is much easier to deal with. I will assume that (a) and (d) are worth 2 points each, and that (b) and (c) are worth 3 apiece. Now, (d) can be captured. however, (b) cannot be captured because the strength of (d) alone is not enough to ice (a). We are ignoring (c) because it is not participating, and therefore we cannot capture it.

There are sometimes ways for the defending player to get at those fat juicy (b) and (c) pieces, with a minimum of sacrifice. Let's look at the second picture again, and indulge ourselves in some imaginary play. It should be noted that if another attack piece (e) is pointed at (a), the standing piece will be over iced enough to warrant capture of (b). [The other two attack pieces (d) and (e) now have enough strength to continue icing.] After (b) is captured, (c) is once again attacking (a) and is now a participant in over icing. Players who are into tip blocking should be wary of this maneuver a spare prisoner (or some diplomacy) and a little ingenuity can suddenly turn your enemy's stash pad into a prison camp.

-- Dr Cool

Dear Icers,

I and several of my friends recently introduced a whole new bunch of people to Icehouse [and] we found a great new playing surface. At the icing session, we decided to try a fiberglass cafeteria tray as a board. This worked great. It's not slick at all, it has no sharp comers, and no edges to overhang. It's a little small, but since you can place the stash pads outside it on the table, there's just enough room for a good game.

Be Seeing You,
Elliott C. Evans

Dear Elliot,

Cool, man! Just remember to take the food off the tray first. Keep Icing!

-- Dr Cool

Dear Dr Cool,

In the Mystique book, you mentioned the "Jiggle" or "Near Crash". Could you please clarify the difference between a Crash and a Jiggle? My friend says that anything that moves the pieces is a crash, and he's always yelling crash for even the tiniest of changes, but I say it isn't a crash unless you really mess up. What do you say? Also, what do you do if you crash when you are attempting to remove a piece, like when you're capturing a prisoner? How about if you crash when you aren't doing anything with a piece at all, like if your elbow accidentally bumps something?

-- Clumsy and Confused

Dear Clumsy,

To answer this, we must think about the reasons behind the crash rule. The placement of pieces upon the playing field is not supposed to change during the game. If something disrupts the arrangement, you must pay a penalty.

Ok, so a "Crash" is a play that actually changes the arrangement of pieces on the field. You might do this if you are trying to squeeze a piece into a tight spot and the pieces around the spot move out slightly, enlarging the area, or you could bump a piece and it make it move to another position. If things really do change, you should give up the piece as a penalty.

A "Jiggle", however, is a crash that doesn't really change anything. If you bump a piece and it tips up but then falls back to the exact same position, then nothing has really changed and no penalty is needed. Here's another way of thinking about it: when a piece is played, the space it occupies is its "footprint". If it's a crash, then the piece's footprint will be different; if it's just a jiggle, the piece will have the same footprint.

Remember the philosophy: the crash rule is not meant to penalize mere clumsiness; it's purpose is to penalize actions that change the way pieces are positioned on the board, and therefore the inherent strategic situation. If nothing changes, no penalty should be paid.

Finally, remember that if you're just playing for fun in your own home, you should be a little more forgiving about crashes than you might be in a tournament or in a game where high stakes are being' gambled.

If you crash while attempting to remove a piece, then you give away the piece you were trying to remove. If you crash when you aren't playing or capturing anything, you pay no penalty; just put things back the way they should have been.

-- Dr Cool

Dear Dr Cool,

Suppose you get a prisoner before you've played your first two pieces. If you play the prisoner standing up, does it count as one of your two required defensive pieces?

- A tournament player

Dear Tournament Player,

No. Keep in mind that prisoners are not your pieces, but are merely under your control. Once you have played a prisoner, you have no claim to it at all; it belongs completely to the owner. Therefore, playing a prisoner defensively would only help your opponent meet his meltdown quota. Meanwhile, you are still accountable for having your own two defenders on the table.

-- Dr Cool

Dear Dr Cool,

I'm writing this to express my feelings about the greatest contribution to the game since the Egyptians'. No, not any rules clarification, not any nifty variation. I'm talking about those "Double-Plus Ultra-Nifty Wazoo" containers that the expansion sets came in this year.

They keep the different colors (colours for you Anglophiles) separate for easy distribution. They're also marked so you can tell the colors (colours) apart. They're resealable and, I'm told, water proof (I can't see any disaster in getting your pieces wet, but a precaution is a precaution). Best of all, however, is that shape they fold into. When fully closed, they make a triangular prism with tetrahedron-shaped indentations on the ends. It goes well with the motif of the game, and just plain looks gosh dam neat (excuse my language).

The only disadvantage I found with this godsend is that they're just a bit too small to put in a stash pad, unless you'd want (everybody brace yourselves) to FOLD it (I can hear the shudders from here). But what's the box for, anyway.

I was so impressed with this Tupperware Of The Gods that I begged the nice people at the Tournament for four empties for my original colors (colours). I guess that makes me the first one on my block at something (Yay!).

You've got to tell me where you got these, guys. I mean,... WHAT! They're what?! Yecch! You mean people did that to these on airplanes? But they're so clean... Huh? Oh, they're unused. I knew that. (I feel like an idiot.)

- Greg Crowe

Dear Greg,

I fear your letter may have left some of our readers saying "HUH?" so let me provide a small bit of explanation. At this year's tournament, we sold Icehouse sets as complete, boxed four-player game sets and as individually packaged, single-player expansion sets. The latter were available in a wide range of colors, so that people could mix and match their own game sets. We packaged the expansion sets in plain white air sickness bags, which were folded up in such as way as to have a triangular cross section. Since we stopped producing hand made sets shortly after the tournament, this turned out to be a short lived phenomena, which is great for you, Greg, since the few that exist have become Icehouse collectors items.

- Dr Cool

Dear Dr Cool:

What is the best chemical to clean or polish my Icehouse pieces with (i.e. nail polish remover?)

- C.D.

Dear C.D.,

I sent your letter down to the technical dudes in the lab, and they conducted some experiments in cleaning Icehouse pieces. Their results, however, contained no breakthroughs. Though they tried cleaning pieces with a number of chemicals, they ultimately found nothing they felt was safe enough to recommend. Windex, for example, "clouds" the pieces, that is, it destroys the crystal clear finish. Our technical folks assume the same thing would happen with nail polish remover, but didn't actually try it because they didn't have any nail polish remover. Hot water seems to soften the plastic slightly, making the piece take fingerprints, although cold water seems to be OK. Bestine (a rubber cement solvent and thinner) also seemed OK, though the results were somewhat inconclusive. In fact, the only thing the lab report said was safe enough to recommend is a soft, clean cloth.

In short, the safest thing to do is to simply keep your pieces from getting dirty. However, if your friends have just finished playing Pizza Icehouse and have covered your lovely little pyramids with greasy fingerprints and tomato sauce, then try to make do by thoroughly wiping them off with tissue.

- Dr Cool

THE CHEESEBALL MANEUVER

Ok, so youre tired of getting put in the Icehouse, and it seems like you can never get a fortress built in time to prevent it. And so, you get this great idea. When the game begins and everyone is playing pieces in the middle of the table, you instead play several pieces over to the side, using the edge of the stash pad or the edge of the table or even both as defensible locations. And you stand up several defensive pieces quickly, gaining a safe and secure fortress early on in the game. You now don't have to worry about getting put in the Icehouse. The only problem is that the other players seem to be annoyed at you. Why is this?

This strategy has become known as the "Cheeseball Maneuver". It was so named at the Second International Icehouse Tournament, where players who employed this rather poor tactic were called "Cheeseballs." Why is this a poor tactic? Because it's a cop-out. It is a way of meeting a game goal without using any tactical skills or clever strategies. Also, since the maneuver is conducted on the side, away from the real arena of play, it smacks of cowardice.

This leads to a commonly asked question: Is this tactic Uncool? Well ... it's Cool to play to the center, but it isn't exactly Uncool to play to the side. The thing to remember is that the Cheeseball Maneuver is typically used by inexperienced or desperate players. Inexperienced players use it because they aren't yet skilled enough to find more interesting and equally safe ways of building fortresses. Desperate players use the Cheeseball not at the beginning of the game, but when they are approaching their stash limit and feel they can't get a fortress any other way. There's nothing uncool about using the Cheeseball in this kind of situation, since even the most experienced player can get desperate.

The real problem with the Cheeseball Maneuver is that it leads boring, stagnated games. As players get better at Icehouse, they soon realize that a cop-out tactic like the Cheeseball quickly leads to lackluster games. The fun of Icehouse comes from struggle. It's not unlike a movie or a book; there must be conflict - without it, there's nothing to hold one's interest. Players who use the Cheeseball are depriving themselves of the stress and excitement of trying to eke out a fortress in a hostile world. This is a major part of the fun of Icehouse... and what's the point of playing the game if isn't fan? After players use the Cheeseball for a while, they will either evolve to better strategies or will simply stop playing, because their games are always dull.

Once learned, the Cheeseball can be difficult to unlearn. Players who get in the habit of using the Cheeseball may find themselves unable to build other types of fortresses. The Cheeseball also doesn't always work as well as one might expect it to. It can, after all, be an expensive way to get a fortress, and while it may help keep you out of the Icehouse, it may not help you win the game. This was proven at the Tournament when Ruth Conley (who went on to win the Tournament) won a grueling game in which all three of her opponents used the Cheeseball.

So, remember these points if you are a skilled player and you find yourself up against someone who uses the Cheeseball. Instead of getting mad at them, try teaching your opponent to use strategies other than the Cheeseball. It is, after all, cool for skilled players to teach new players the finer points of the game. On the other hand, if you're a player who uses the Cheeseball maneuver, then throw away this crutch! If you try, you can walk without it.

HAUNTED ICEHOUSE

This is another variation designed to improve two player games, and it also works best with only two players. In this variation, a non-existent player is created, a "ghost" player, if you will. This ghost player gets a full stash pad of pieces, and can make plays just like a normal player. The ghost can be put in the Icehouse, and can even win the game (although it really shouldn' t happen).

The ghost makes his plays by possessing the human players and controlling their actions, forcing them to move his pieces for him. Hence, any players can play pieces at anytime from the ghost's stash pad. The ghost's stash pad should therefore be placed within easy reach of both of the normal players.

To keep the ghost from melting down, each normal player is required to play one defensive piece for the ghost before playing any of their own pieces. After that, they can play the ghost's pieces in any legal way as often or infrequently as they see fit.

The ghost never seems to notice when he's over iced, and therefore never captures over icing pieces. He can, however, be given prisoners (after a crash or wrong icehouse call) and he uses them as he sees fit. When all pads are clear, don't forget to count the ghost's score. You may be surprised at how well he sometimes does.

After you've played this variation a couple of times, you may wish to add the following optional rule: When the ghost is in danger of being put in the icehouse, he always calls icehouse on himself before either of the normal players are able to call it on him, thereby allowing the ghost to maintain control of his pieces.

NUCLEAR ICEHOUSE

For this variation, you will need an atomic bomb. (Ours is modeled after the one built by Bill in the original "Icehouse" story.) The bomb should have a flat surface on top for playing, an easily-pressed activation switch, and a brief countdown clock (say 60 seconds). Before starting the game, arm the bomb and remove or disable any and all safety mechanisms, so that when the button is pressed, countdown to detonation will automatically commence. Then play any version of Icehouse, using the top of the bomb for the playing area. At any point, any player who wishes to may press the activation button. Once this happens, the rules of Timer Icehouse kick in. Keep playing while the bomb is ticking, and stop when the countdown clock reaches zero. You lose the points for all pieces that remain unplayed when the game ends.

Note: Scoring may be difficult unless your bomb fails to detonate.

NUMBER 12'S HOUSE RULE

This is an alternate method of interpreting walls, which can be substituted for the standard wall rule if all players agree. Number 12 favors this rule over the normal one, and encourages adopting it whenever he plays (hence the name).

First, let's clarify/introduce a few terms. The "victim" is the defensive piece which is under attack. The "attacker" is the attacking piece. A "wall" is an obstruction between an attacker and its victim, and is composed of "wall pieces" and a "wall boundary". "Wall pieces" are nearby pieces that the attacker must get past in order to ice its victim. The " wall boundary" is a line drawn between the wall pieces; the attacker must cross this line in order for its attack to be successful. A wall boundary is a theoretical obstruction defined by the locations of actual obstructions. The wall boundary must exclusively cross open space; if the wall boundary passes through other pieces (such as the victim) then the wall is useless "pseudo-wall".

The figure shows how Number 12's house rule works. Instead of considering a wall boundary to be the SHORTEST DISTANCE between two wall pieces, this rule calls for drawing the wall boundary between the CORNERS of the wall pieces. This removes the confusion of figuring out exactly where the wall boundary crosses the playing area, in cases where the shortest distance is ambiguous or difficult to determine. With the comer to comer method, the location of the wall is always clear. The wall boundary is always formed by drawing a line from the comer of one wall piece to the comer of another one.

With this rule, the wall that must be breached is marked by the wall boundary that is: 1) nearest to the victim piece and 2) not a pseudo-wall. There are usually a number of different wall boundaries that can be drawn between the comers of the two wall pieces involved; therefore, the wall that must be breached is the wall boundary drawn between the comers that are nearest to the victim piece, unless that wall is a pseudo-wall, in which case the next closest comers are used.

If either (or both) of the wall pieces are attack pieces, then the wall boundary is drawn only from the comers at the pyramid's base, i.e. the tip of the attack piece does not count as a comer.

KIDNAPPER ICEHOUSE

by Chris Welsh

The Doc & I thought of this variation at a local Vietnamese restaurant. We didn't have our sets, so instead we engaged in our 2nd favorite mealtime activity: Grousing about those stodgemeiers who hold all their pieces back and force everyone else to languish.

So the thrust of this variation is to punish stodgemeiers. However, it is called Kidnapper, rather than, say, Icebreaker or Anti-stodgemeier, because it has some other effects as well. But first, the rule itself. "If, at any point during play, you find that another player has 3 times as many pieces (or more) on their stash as you do, you may call "Kidnapping", and seize the piece of your choice from their stash, Play stops only for the 2 players involved in the call. Play recommences when the piece is seized. You may not invoke the nile if your stash is empty."

Note the rule cannot be invoked when play is suspended, such as during an icehouse call. One might anticipate a flurry of Kidnapper calls after a successful icehouse call, though. This should help ameliorate the heretofore crushing advantage conferred by a successful icehouse call, although this hasn't come up much in testing (i.e. not at all).

When using this rule, it is cool to allow the victim to check the stash pads (their own and the kidnapper's) to verify that a kidnapping can take place. Notice that, as the choice of kidnapped piece goes to the kidnapper, such a call can proceed in the absence of the victimized player. (Children are usually kidnapped when their parents aren't watching, not so?) In this case, it is considered cool to either be scrupulously careful about your math, or to invite someone else to check you. Also, if another player does a kidnapping without inviting anyone to check the math, it is not uncool for you to go ahead and check it anyway.

A Kidnapping call involves only 2 players. If you wish to kidnap more than I piece, you must make several calls. But the more pieces you kidnap, the harder it becomes to pull off new capers, because more pieces are accumulating on your pad.

A strategy made possible by this rule is the "force". First you look around the game and figure out at what threshold you will be able to call "Kidnapping" on your opponent(s). Then you quickly power out enough pieces to attain the threshold and make your calls. The prisoners can be used as human shields to protect your newly placed pieces, or retained for future leverage. This strategy is useful as a dynamic option when you are up against your stash limit without a fortress (between a rock and an icehouse).

Here's an illustrative example: Sam has two pieces in his stash, and notices that Patty has seven (including one in her hand, which she is ready to play), this is more than 3 times the number of pieces in his stash. Sam calls "kidnapping", and points to Patty, who frowns, maybe says a naughty word, and waits patiently for the dirty deed to be enacted. Sam then takes a nice fat 3-point piece from his opponent's miserly stash, and adds it to his pad. Now Sam has three pieces in his stash. If he wants to continue his crime wave, he must either play a piece to the field first (allowing him to kidnap again from Patty), or he must look for a player with nine or more stashed pieces.

SIGNATURES

Below are some new signatures that were exhibited or created at this year's tournament. Some of these will not work too well on the standard stash pad, so you may want to reserve them for times when using something else for stash pads, such as napkins.

THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL ICEHOUSE TOURNAMENT

This year's tournament was a huge success. It took place in a lovely hotel room overlooking the pool, concurrent with the Disclave Science Fiction Convention in beautiful New Carrollton Maryland. It lasted for two and a half days, and by the time it was over, everyone involved was thoroughly exhausted.

On Friday evening, the room first opened. People drifted in, buying up the limited supply of sets that were available for sale, asking questions, signing up, and playing. Many people eventually trickled in, experts and novices both, and by the late evening many games were going on at the various round tables. At lam the Referees finally called for last game and reluctantly kicked everyone out.

On Saturday the tournament began in earnest. Things were slow to start, but by early afternoon the room was crowded with players. Ultimately 25 people registered, though many more stopped by to socialize, observe, inquire, and/or learn to play. 'Me qualifying requirement of two wins was a hard goal for some, as the competition was quite fierce, and only 16 people advanced to the second day's rounds. Of particular note here is Donovan Chase, a younger player who played hard all day, but wasn't able to pull out enough wins to qualify. His determination still caught the attention of the Referees, who presented him with a T-shirt as an honorable mention award for his perseverence.

On Sunday the tournament became truly intense. Each player had to play five games, of which their top three would be counted, provided they were played against at least six different opponents. As the various players finished their games, their ratings were calculated and people speculated wildly as to who would make it into the finals. For a long time it looked like Donald DiPaula, Ruth Conley, Kara Gray, and Dawn Petrlik would be the finalists, but in the final hour Frank Cooper pulled out an extra win that bumped him in and Dawn out.

Not long after 8 o'clock that night, the final match began. The first two games dragged terribly, besieged by stagnation. The players were undoubtedly worn pretty well down by the long days of gaining. Each of the first two games lasted over an hour. The finalists had been informed that the tournament would end at Midnight, and that if their first games took too long, their last games would become Timer games, the length of the timer being determined by the lateness of the hour. When faced with the prospect of another hour long game and two five minute timer games, the players choose to set a 20 minute timer for all of the three remaining games.

Things looked like a sure win for Donald until the final round. Then, seeing that he was clearly in the lead, the others worked against him, throwing their weight to Ruth, who emerged victorious. Her prizes consisted of the Winning set, the actual set she had used to win the tournament, a tournament T-shirt specially screened with the words "I WON", one hundred thousand dollars in cash, and the official Icehouse Scepter. Joyce Choat, last year's champion, cheerfully handed this over to her, saying that she had enjoyed her year at the top but was ready to relinquish the position.

The referees awarded one other prize, the coveted "Cooler Than Ice" shirt, which is presented each year to the Tournament's coolest player. This year it went to Stevyn Travillian, who was so incredibly cool that some people, including Dr Cool himself, thought the shirt should have said "Cooler Than Dr Cool".

The final scoreboard is printed below. The following players also participated in the tournament: Lawrence Stoll, Dan Delaney, Cora Dickson, Rob Dean, Donovan Chase, Shawn Dorsey, Maugorn, and Kit Cooper. Thanks to everyone who made the Tournament such a total success, and we look forward to seeing you all next year.

OUR PATENT!

Patent #4,936,585, "Method of Manipulating and Interpreting Playing Pieces", invented by Andrew J. Looney and John W. Cooper, was issued by the Patent and Trademark Office of the United States Department of Commerce on June 26, 1990. This important and valuable legal instrument gives Icehouse Games all exclusive rights to the manufacture and sale of games embodying the method of playing Icehouse. These rights will last for 17 years. The Patent was prosecuted entirely by Mr. Looney, with the invaluable assistance of a big legal self-help book called Patent-It-Yourself which Mr. Looney strongly recommends to any and all other inventors. You don't need a lawyer, all you need is this book. If you're interested in a copy of the patent, let us know and we'll send you one in exchange for only a dollar to help cover printing and postage.

GET YOUR PATENT T-SHIRT! 100% cotton T-shirts available in M, L, and XL. The shirts are silver with black ink, and feature our patent number (Andy's new favorite number) along with the Abstract and the main patent illustration. These are great shirts folks, you don't want to miss out on this one. My niece looks particularly good in her shirt, which comes down well below her knees. They cost only $10 (plus $2 if you want your shirt by way of the postal system.) Send your orders to ICEHOUSE at P.O. BOX 761, College Park , MD 20740. Don't forget to let us know what size you want. Make checks . payable to ICEHOUSE GAMES.