  Competitive resource allocation between adversarial decision makers arises in
a wide spectrum of real-world applications such as in communication systems,
cyber-physical systems security, as well as financial, political, and electoral
competition. As such, developing analytical tools to model and analyze
competitive resource allocation is crucial for devising optimal allocation
strategies and anticipating the potential outcomes of the competition. To this
end, the Colonel Blotto game is one of the most popular game-theoretic
frameworks for modeling and analyzing such competitive resource allocation
problems. However, in many real-world competitive situations, the Colonel
Blotto game does not admit solutions in deterministic strategies and, hence,
one must rely on analytically complex mixed-strategies with their associated
tractability, applicability, and practicality challenges. In this paper, a
generalization of the Colonel Blotto game which enables the derivation of
deterministic, practical, and implementable equilibrium strategies is proposed
while accounting for the heterogeneity of the battlefields. In addition, the
proposed generalized game enables accounting for the consumed resources in each
battlefield, a feature that is not considered in the classical Blotto game. For
the generalized game, the existence of a Nash equilibrium in pure-strategies is
shown. Then, closed-form analytical expressions of the equilibrium strategies,
are derived and the outcome of the game is characterized; based on the number
of resources of each player as well as the valuation of each battlefield. The
generated results provide invaluable insights on the outcome of the
competition. For example, the results show that, when both players are fully
rational, the more resourceful player can achieve a better total payoff at the
Nash equilibrium, a result that is not mimicked in the classical Blotto game.
