I tried several times to add SL-Mark and Sandoz as moderators, but now I found out they can't be because they're not paying members. Are/is there any paying member(s) willing to moderate this board? Let me know and I'll add you if the group agrees.
Sandoz: Dear Sandoz, since you seem to be the most active in the espionage community, maybe you should take over the role of moderator? I don't play the game anymore and sometimes it takes a few days before I even notice there's a new message on this board (yes, I feel ashamed). Would you like to be moderator of this messageboard? You can set a description and there are a few other possibilities.
Just today the (hopefully) final round of Open Espionage League Brain prize Tourney (start april 2010) has started. I don't know if I feel like starting a new tournament, I don't believe in 'fast' anymore. Fisher's clock stil allows for vacations, right?
I was checking out if Resher and TheBlackKnight still played espionage (that was the main idea of my tournament, to get new talent into the League), and found out I'm still in a tournament dating 2010, waiting for the next round. Completely forgotten about it! Strange you cannot find it anywhere, should be nice to have it mentioned on your main page. Hmmm, I haven't played espionage for some while, can't seem to focuss on the game and play lousy, have to get back on track before the next round starts! Well, maybe that will not be untill 2013 ;)
SL-Mark: Your answer is almost the same as my answer to him, but I didn't want to speak for others, that's why I put the question out here. The League doesn't really exist here either, unfortunately. Could you give me the link to the 2012 Championship? I must say I had already forgotten about it, ahem... Quad doesn't like the interface here at BK. I don't like it either I must confess. And I don't like the overload of tournaments.
Hi all, at IYT someone approached me to ask me about the League. He wants to set up a competition at IYT and wanted to know about the League, what worked and what not. I tried to answer as good as I could, adding I thought it would be hard with so many quitting/leaving to BK.
He asked if there were players here who were willing to return if there was a serious competition going at IYT. I can't answer for you, so I'll ask the question here.
Celticjim: Sandoz isn't really new, haha. He used to play under the name 'Hageroff' (do I spell that right, Sandoz?) and was my first sabotage opponent at IYT, so if he's new, I'm a real newbee ;) I didn't get a message from Moonhippie either.
Celticjim: no, I haven't asked about the bug. Sorry! Some time ago I was busy trying to see what the consensus for a draw rule was, but didn't succeed. My plan was to combine the request for a draw rule with the request to change the bug. Now we also have the request we want to make for a diagonal version. At the moment I do not have the time to address people personally to get opinions or to formulate different options so players can vote for them. Maybe someone else can step up to take these tasks? You can put my name under the request for any of the diagonal variants, draw rule (50 or more noncapture moves) and the bug.
Justaminute: I do not agree with you on that. The rule not to be able to move the piece back where you came from is one of the best rules of espionage in my opinion. I'm not a fan of defensive play, but this rule makes defensive play harder as well. One can corner an opponent by limiting their movement abilities using this rule. As has just been done to me...
Nothingness: I think the chances of getting the rule implemented are higher if the rule is simple, clear and same for all variants. If we choose for the 60 moves instead of 50, you also have the 10 moves extra in the beginning.
Dark Prince: I guess you misunderstood me. I actually made a proposal to request a draw rule so you could conclude I think it's a good thing to install one. (my point to Nothingness was I don't see the point in reinstalling a committee, I think it's best to go to Fencer if someone doesn't accept the draw, since he can inforce it, my other point to Nothingness was that I don't see other draw situations needing a rule, much less needing a committee).
My question to everyone; is 60 moves ok? Or do we want 50 moves like in chess?
In my opinion there shouldn't be a stalemate rule in espionage; there's no king, no piece with a 'forbidden' move, like in chess. So if you put yourself in a position where you can only be captured or walk into a bomb, you've lost. It's not forbidden in espionage to do either.
Nothingness: we can ask for a draw rule to be implemented in the espionage rules, and I would be happy to do so as soon as there is a consensus what exactly we want to ask for.
DRAW RULE PROPOSAL: a draw can be asked for after 60 moves of non-capture. (seems a simple and clear rule to me). I would like to hear from you all what you think of this, so I can make the request to Fencer.
A committe only has authority to those who choose to be part of the group listening to this committee, which seems to me to be the people who would already be reasonable. A committee would also have to have a draw rule to apply. How often does the situation occur anyway? I've never had such situation.
If chess has a 50 move rule and sabotage at IYT has it for some variants, maybe it's best to ask for at least 50 moves for all variants here? Same for all seems most clear to me. 60 moves is fine with me (as cookie monster asked for). Could everyone live with that?
@Dark Prince: With y I referred to your earlier post: To allow for slow starters, the 50 move rule could start at move 25 and the 35 move rule for smaller boards could start at move 15 for the open variations. 50 moves starting at move 50 and 35 moves starting at move 30 for the volcano variations.
dAGGER: I think a minimum number of moves with no capture is a good rule to force a draw, if one of the opponents claims for it: 1) it is simple to remember for everyone 2) it helps preventing games to go on years, when only a player is very slow 3) if two skilled and defensive players agree on going on, it does not oblige to end up the game as a draw, if no opponent asks for it."
I agree with dAGGER completely. For this reason I think the rules shoudln't be too different between the various variants, best would be 1 and the same rule (x amount of noncapture moves maybe with an addition of beginning after move y)
Nothingness: It seems clear to me this way.Within a turn the moves are one after another - proven by the fact you can go to the spot just left by one of your other pieces. So within a turn a spy can identify (an) opponent's piece(s) before dying.
Dark Prince: yes, you're right, that's consistent. Let's create what we think should be added to the rules (clarification moves within turn) and the draw issue, then I can go to Fencer to ask it to be included in the rules.
Dark Prince: You got a strong point! It would be good to have it mentioned explicitly in the rules though. We could at least ask for that along with a draw rule. I haven't asked for that yet since we didn't get to the point of the definite set of draw rules we wanted implemented.
Thom27: I guess it's the same effect as we discovered before with capturing an opponent's spy; if (in the same move) you place a piece next to the spy before capturing it, that piece will become visible for the opponent. As long as you know that it's no problem since you can avoid this by capturing the spy first.
What you mention seems to be unavoidedablt by your opponent. They won't even know you know what you captured. This seems to be a bug to me, does everyone agree on that? I suggest we should report it.
Dark Prince: I agree that a capture of a piece is an easy and objective criterium and a clear indication that the game is still in progress. I like your idea to have a 'starting point', only it would be nice to have 1 rule for all variants, to keep it clear.
Maybe 50 moves without capture starting after move 50 for the 3 volcano variants (the small volcano variant is often slower than Fast Espionage) and 50 moves after move 25 for Open and Small fast, to keep it simple?
Dark Prince: We can request Fencer to add a draw rule to the rules. And since we already have the agreement of fair play regarding illegal moves, we may just as well add a draw situation to it in my opinion.
Pedro Martínez: Is it at all possible to have the move reversed? At BK some things seem to be impossible while they seem logical and wanted, like the next round of a tournament starting as soon as the winners of the previous round are known. In that case we have to wait untill all games of the previous round have finished, whether or not their outcome is relevant. That's why I wonder if it's possible to have a move reversed. My guess is it can't.
(hide) If you want to save on bandwidth you can reduce the amount of information that shows up in your pages in the Settings. Try changing the number of games in the main page and the number of messages per page. (pauloaguia) (show all tips)