An Avoider-Enforcer game (also called Avoider-Forcer game[1] or Antimaker-Antibreaker game[2] ) is a kind of positional game. Like most positional games, it is described by a set of positions/points/elements (
X
l{F}
A classic example of such a game is Sim. There, the positions are all the edges of the complete graph on 6 vertices. Players take turns to shade a line in their color, and lose when they form a full triangle of their own color: the losing sets are all the triangles.
The winning condition of an Avoider-Enforcer game is exactly the opposite of the winning condition of the Maker-Breaker game on the same
l{F}
For example, consider the biased version of the games, in which the first player takes p elements each turn and the second player takes q elements each turn (in the standard version p=1 and q=1). Maker-Breaker games are bias-monotonic: taking more elements is always an advantage. Formally, if Maker wins the (p:q) Maker-Breaker game, then he also wins the (p+1:q) game and the (p:q-1) game. Avoider-Enforcer games are not bias-monotonic: taking more elements is not always a disadvantage. For example, consider a very simple Avoider-Enforcer game where the losing sets are and . Then, Avoider wins the (1:1) game, Enforcer wins the (1:2) game and Avoider wins the (2:2) game.
There is a monotone variant of the (p:q) Avoider-Enforcer game-rules, in which Avoider has to pick at least p elements each turn and Enforcer has to pick at least q elements each turn; this variant is bias-monotonic.
Similarly to Maker-Breaker games, Avoider-Enforcer games also have fractional generalizations.
Suppose Avoider needs to avoid taking at least a fraction t of the elements in any winning-set (i.e., take at most 1-t of the elements in any set), and Enforcer needs to prevent this, i.e., Enforcer needs to take less than a fraction t of the elements in some winning-set. Define the constant:
ct:=(2t)t ⋅ (2-2t)1-t=2 ⋅ tt ⋅ (1-t)1-t
t=1,ct\to2
\sumE\in
Biased positional game#A winning condition for Avoider