Liste der Diskussionsforen
Es ist Dir nicht erlaubt, Nachrichten in diesem Forum zu schreiben. Man muss dazu mindestens den Mitgliedsrang Brain Bauer (Pawn) haben!
ok, so I made a startlist. Anyone who wants to be added (or removed) from the list, just post here or send me a message. I'll add the circumstances as soon as we have agreed how to describe it.
SL-Mark: I'll make a post oin the tournamentboard, good idea. It's not really such extra hassle to send out invites since you have to send out messages to get players in anyway. You're right though; slow players will time out in the first round.
I can't change the set up of the tournament anymore- only starting date and info.
Mikong: if he only plays 1 move per 5 days he'll time out straight away since the time limit is 1 day 6 hrs. I can ask him if he thinks he can play this fast before inviting him.
Thema: Re: Who wants to be in and who knows other fast players?
dAGGER: just sent you an invite and love to have you in, only you're still in the second round of Sabotage League - Small Fast Espionage - #2... Become a member so you can join :)
Thema: Re: Who wants to be in and who knows other fast players?
SL-Mark: Given the fact you're so new and have little faith in your talent I thought I'd give the tournament a modest size, but ok, if you insist I'll give you more competitors to improve your strength
I've deleted the old draft and created a new one, hope I didn't make any mistakes there. Do sign up (again)!
Thema: Who wants to be in and who knows other fast players?
Let me know so I can send invitations. Yes, I made it invite only so we really have a fast tournament. Also want to know about any new promising talents playing fast.
We could set up a small single elimination tournament, this is a lot faster. We'd best choose small fast i guess, so pawns who enter this one are ready for the next tournament once it starts. How about it?
Tian-Xian: We want to have players move at least once a day so the tournament doesn't take forever. If you can play several times on other days no one will make a problem of you not moving on sunday.
Mikong: Hi Mikong, welcome on the espionage bord, great to see you here :) What kind of tournament did you have in mind? Small espionage isn't popular to all espionage fans because of the length of the game. It's much slower than small fast or open fast espionage. Though I do believe there are some who especially like the variant, I think Nothingness and Altermann do and the Alchemist and I believe Sandoz still likes the variant. I'd be willing to join as well.
Also, we haven't had a serieus small espionage competition for some time which would be a good arguement for doing it. The biggest problem would be not just the length of the game, but the length of the entire tournament. We've been discussing the issues on that matter on this board. Maybe a single elimination would take some of the problems and inviting only those who don't play extremely slow.
Nothingness: it would be difficult to tell before set up because in that case the opponent would make a set up based on that, giving their information back, leading to a change in set up from the 1st person etc. I'd say you make the set up and give the information before the 1st move.
I only have 1 problem: I don't think I can play two such games at the same time because of the tracking. If it's okay with you I'll play Eric first. Shouldn't take that long given the way and frequency of our play.
cookie monster: as said, I'd happily take a shot Only problem is you can't reveal them without me revealing my recons. Or I'd have to make an enormous amount of notes. I'm willing to try though. After my holidays an invite will be waiting :)
Verändert von Chaos (18. September 2010, 13:27:47)
SL-Mark: I don't care about the mines anymore. In my early days I've walked into one of Sandoz' (when he was still hageroff) mines with a 5 after deducting this piece couldn't be backed up by a sab or 5. Eversince I know how to deal with unmovable pieces.As for your offer, I'm more interested in your 4s. How about your 4s and your base?
cookie monster: Even if you know all my 1s it would be hard to get around them! I think I could stop/get rid of your recons using my 1s, some 2s and some of my recons. I'd go for the deal!
SL-Mark: Would you show me your five 1s and I'll show you where one of my 5s is located?
I wouldn't. First because you know five of my pieces and I would only know one, but also because you know all of one sort: you know all of my 1s, so none of my other pieces can be a 1. I would only know one of your 5's, so I cannot conclude anything about the rest of your pieces.
cookie monster: Why the need to change? just curious.
And how about the Open Espionage League Brain prize Tourney? you'll continue playing that one, right? Would be a shame to lose a possible winner because of an identitycrisis.
Sandoz: The problem is only paying members can become part of a team. There was a plain espionage teamtournament starting quite some time ago, but plain espionage is a bit too slow for me. I would join fast mini or open fast. I'd love a teamtournament!
Maybe with the new espionage players who joined the beginner's tournament and with players like you signing up for a paid membership we could get a good tournament going!
Nothingness: you could use simple thick carton squares. On one side you have a questionmark, on the other side the espionage piece. I admit it wouldn't look attractive, but it's simple and effective. The only difference with the real game is that you know when your opponent detected a piece.
AbigailII: what Nothingness means is that his opponent waits 2 weeks before moving. I've played Nothingness often enough to know he doesn't wait 2 weeks. If your opponent waits 2 weeks it's impossible for you to play more than twice a month and there's nothing you can do about it which is very frustrating indeed.
The problem is that if it's in the rules, someone is allowed to move slow. You can ask your opponents if they want to move faster, but they don't have to.
Dark Prince: I agree completely with Dark Prince on the time tactics. Why stalling to try to get your opponent out of balance? Your opponents will probably think you've been away or are just anxious for the next move. They're not occupied with your reasons for delaying.
Nothingness, I understand you want clear rules and fast games, in that case it's best not to stall yourself. The way you explain situations you want to avoid make it seem you create them yourself as well. I understand you don't, but the discussion is quite misleading.
Maybe just go back to what format is best? It will always stay a problem. For a real fast tournament you'll have to accept time outs.
Nothingness: if you think like that in a game against me you'll be puzzled all the time . I sometimes I make clicks instead of moves because I don't want to think while I really should, and sometimes I can't move in the rare case I actually have a plan.
AbigailII: you should have some extra time to allow for a day away now and then. In a tournament with several rounds you will be away at some point. I go to an internet cafe on holidays every other day when I'm in a tournament. But I won't go every day. And sometimes there's a day when you simply can't move because you travel all day or visit someone.
We'll just have to accept a few months for a round I think. I can live with that.
Nothingness: You can always track down the piece you've seen once by looking at the move list on the right, so the pieces might as well stay visible. You could replace the vulcanoes by these grey spots. This way you can move the pieces already seen without further revealing and choose to reveal more to gain more movement freedom. I like the idea!
happy hermit: sounds great! Will there be speed limits? What will the strength of the engineer be?
I was thinking of a 'super' recon/spy able to see all pieces in the row and column it stands in. The view is blocked by vulcanoes, by bombs and by 'block pieces'. Maybe the 1s could be the blocking pieces?
Justaminute: I don't agree with you. As some of you may know I have quite an agressive style. When I attack I use the fact that my opponent cannot move back. For example when I move a piece of the same strength right where my opponent's piece came from. When my opponent can endlessly move back and forth to escape there are several ways of attacking I can't use anymore. Like when the opponent moves between 2 bombs, now it takes 2 moves before this player can move out again. Also if both players keep moving back and forth the game ends in a draw. This will happen a lot.
I think this rule is one of the strong features of espionage. Changing this in an added new version would be very confusing.
I've looked through my documents and was surprised to found quite some old sabotage material. Lists of League players, photo's of players who allowed their pictures to be in future sab albums, ideas etc. No stats though.
I did find these thoughts for a cannon piece:
Lou: Cannons: Two immobile cannon pieces, that are able to fire one or two (two moves) squares ahead. Firing two squares away requires the first square to be empty. Also, once a cannon fires, then it cannot fire on the very next turn [takes time to reload a cannon]. - Cannons: Two immobile cannon pieces, that are able to fire one or two (two moves) squares ahead. Firing two squares away requires the first square to be empty. Also, once a cannon fires, then it cannot fire on the very next turn [takes time to reload a cannon]. Cannon piece, staying immobile, but able to "fire" at a square or two (2 moves) directly ahead (cannon vulnerable to any piece and not able to fire two consecutive turns).
The Limbaugh Express: You can use it only once every 4 moves and cannot use it in the first 10 moves. The cannon should be able to hit any square in the first 9 rows in Open Rush and first 7 rows in Mini Open Rush (Also it can shoot over pieces just like a real cannon. The cannon must be placed up front on row 3 and cannot be moved and any piece can disarm the cannon. We should be able to start the game by setting up any of our pieces in the first 5 rows like Crazy Screen Chess. But the cannon must be set up in the 3rd row.
Nothingness: sorry, they're not! It's horrible. At some point Yahoo removed geocities, I learned about it when I tried to log in after I hadn't been there for quite some time.
SL-Mark: The problem with the 4 player individual game is that the site hasn't got the options for multiplayer games yet. Way back I asked Patrick Chu at IYT about possibilities for a 4-player game and he said he would have to change too much in the workings of the game. IYT and BK are set for 2 player games. 2 vs 2 is still the same game, same board, only the moves change between the teamplayers.
Nothingness: I would love 4- player espionage: individual and/or 2 vs 2. The latter should be more easy to establish. 2 vs 2 means the game itself doesn't have to change, only the moves would have to be distributed in a different way.