same with starcraft: "Suppose the two players have bases on different islands, player B has a strong ground army but no income and no way to reach player A, wh

same with starcraft: "Suppose the two players have bases on different islands, player B has a strong ground army but no income and no way to reach player A, while player A has no units and needs exactly x resources to train an army and barely defeat B. Player A starts with just enough resources to train a worker. In yet another un- reachable island, there are n locations, each of which has a main building of A (to which workers must bring the resources they collect) and x=n resources. There is also a worker in each location, but it is "trapped" behind some resource batches, and cannot reach the main building. On each path connecting two locations, there is a turret (or other static defence) of B, positioned in such a way that a lone worker traversing the path isbound to be killed, but if two workers traverse it, exactly one survives. B hopes for a draw, while A has only one strategy: Train a worker at some location, collect the resources, thus setting the second worker free, traverse a path with both workers to reach another location, and repeat. A cannot waste resources into training more than one worker, and can win if and only if the (planar) graph of locations has a Hamiltonian path." which raises the question - what is a game? is it the collection of all possible permutations of states allowed by the rules, as in the Pac-Man generalization or this extremely weird corner case SC scenario that requires extended amounts of sub-optimal play? If I -can- construct such a bizarre and entrenched StarCraft position, is it part of "the game", or is it a weird theoretical custom map whose sole purpose is proving starcraft is np-hard to "solve"