I'm not sure if anyone mentioned this, but we probably need to have an "x" added to the notation so that it can be easier to track the move count. Currently we cannot differentiate between a regular and capture moves.

Chaos: Yes that makes sense, and it would be more clear if it is consistent across the board.

We should probably start to enforce(begin to count) the rule once a potential engagement "can" occur. For example no one can attack for at least 3-4 moves depending upon an opponents response. So we can start counting then. I think someone mentioned starting the counting after a few moves have started.Such as turn 15 or 20. The enemy cannot be engaged until proper reinforcements have been established. The volcano versions make for a more difficult attacking challenge. So perhaps waiting a little bit before starting the count. The open challenge is much easier to attack so a lower start count could be feasible.

I feel that re-installing a committee would help with any rulings. Such as drawn positions. if the committee can look at a situation and decide that "yes i see winning possibilities for white no you cannot be granted a draw" or no you cannot win in this situation draw" i can agree to this.

Nothingness: i apologize for my approach and the wording but it is a fundamental gaming strategy to stall. removing this will ultimately hurt the strategic/ defensive minded players. i will leave the game if such a rule is adopted.

Dark Prince: your obviously new to gaming. Stalling aka turtling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtling_(gameplay)
is a strategy that has been utilized for years. Read the definition before you criticize a legitimate game style that you are incapable of overcoming. the move amounts are a joke and ridiculous. 30 moves is barely enough time to set up a proper defense especially in small volcano versions. 60 moves in a large version is not close enough either. i was looking more at 80-100-120-150 as a gear for implementing a non-attack.

Dark Prince: i agree with mostly everything you stated. the only thing is the moves without a capture especially in the beginning of the game. this is a tricky situation. Solid defense is not attacking 1st or never attacking PERIOD! a threshold count should not be implemented since it is a defensive strategy in the volcano versions. Ialwayswinsam and I used to have on a normal basis 400 move games where no capture occurred for the 1st 200 moves. this was the way the small volcano version have to be played at a high level.

Justaminute: as for moves.. to you the moves are are sequential but to the opp (when you move) they are simultaneous). so its a matter of perspective. this is a turn base game. it just so happens you make more than one move per turn. but after the turn is over all 5 movers happened simultaneously( sort of but not really)

A non-volcano version is tougher to determine. Espionage is geared towards the aggressors favor in this determination. If a 5 attacks a 5 Both are not destroyed. the defender is. so we must not deter solid defensive play. lets say no one attacks for 1st 50 moves in a large open version. We will now look at the ratings of the players if a 2000 rated player is playing a 1500 player and they have gone 50 moves we must assume that the 2000 player is waiting for the 1500 player to move carelessly to get an early advantage. the 2000 rated player might not move first in fear of sacrificing to early. it is possible to force a draw every game if it is played properly. mirroring a position can be quite daunting to overcome. so we must be careful in forcing draws. It has always been my contention if you cannot crack a solid defensive style than you are not that good of a player anyways, why force a person to play your style b/c your too weak to crack a solid defense?

Here is one scenario for a volcano draw situation. Opp material: 4,2,Spy protected base with bombs. You: 3,1,1, protected base with bombs. in this scenario... if the 3 and 4 are separated by more than 2 squares this is a drawn position. i call it the ring around the rosie. the four can never catch the 3 and the 3 can never get to the base since it is protected by bombs and neither player has any sabs. if however either base is exposed then it is not a draw. if a base is exposed and there is sufficient material to win IF the 2nd most powerful piece remaining must be more powerful than the 2nd most powerful piece remaining of the opp that has his base exposed. if not than it is still a draw.

Dark Prince: this still does not clarify the way it is played.. it must be stated through a specific situation.

Chaos: i have always viewed each turn regardless of the amount of moves as one move... 2-3-4-5 moves all the same to me...its the turn that i really look at... like in chess you move 1 at a time... if you were to be able to make 2 moves each turn its still 1 turn... so i combine them.

Dark Prince: the question is really are the moves in a particular game simultaneous or individual. in a 5 move game such as open fast you make 5 moves.. if you move and capture your opp spy first then move pieces forward that would have touched where the spy existed( 8 squares ) the pieces will not be revealed. But if you move those pieces there first then capture the spy than they will be revealed, what has to be decided is if we are going to use Turns or moves. if its turns than something has to be fixed. if its moves then it can stay the same and an explanation needs to be added to clear up confusion. i always was aware of this situation.

no the statement about a win is a win a draw is a draw etc...

Dark Prince: well i disagree with your first 3 statements a win is a win etc.. but i do agree it would not be a simple task and thus not feasible.

Dark Prince: That is difficult to say. The volcano variants are traditionally slower. i think that your suggestions seems reasonable. although for small volcano versions 50+20 is still short and will change the game on an elite level. it is reasonable though. I wish that the rating system would be tweaked for forced draws.

Dark Prince: Starting at the first move of the game puts an immediate damper on the aspect of defense. You have to start attacking without backup. Sometimes revealing pieces early in the game requires time to resetting your pieces and placing them in the correct strategic position. This can take some time. Redeployment is something that can take quite a few moves as not to reveal too much by immediately moving the strong pieces. I think that a fair total would be about 15-20 moves into the game. Also there are certain volcano setups that aren't conducive to attacking and some are easier. What about these?

Dark Prince: we also should take into account that a suicide attack should count for a capture of a piece. thus resetting the 50 move count.

Chaos: 50 moves for each player or 25+25 moves = 50

Dark Prince: with no volcanoes a 50 rules is reasonable. however with volcanoes it should be more than that. I regularly have games that take about 100 before a piece is taken from the board, its just how the game is played.

i dont think a 50 move rule should be worded like chess but perhaps 50 moves without advancement. perhaps a like chinese checkers where all pieces need to be at a certain point by a certain move. you need to advance to a specific rank on the board. Forcing a move forward. This would work best for non volcano games. and perhaps a similar rule for the volcano games. I'm in a game with Mark now that is about move 30 and no one has taken a piece or revealed a piece yet. This will take about another 50-100 more moves until the game gets "started". It's far from over/drawn. a draw rule does need to be implemented, i can agree with that.

Dark Prince: The purpose of a draw is to avoid a game going on forever. Yes i agree that there should be a rule for this. What the rule is needs to be voted on by the people who play the game the most. Generally if two players are of equal skill level and we are at a point early in teh game where no one wants to advance and both plays thus build two walls. The player who attacks first will probably have to sacrifice a piece. Then the 2nd player pounces on that advantage and considers themselves the better player in an eventual win. (not always the case) . This is a strategy and should not be punished. if you are unable to crack a defense then you are not skilled enough or knowledgeable enough to exploit that defense. Asking for a draw b/c a he/she has no way of breaking a defense is simply weak! There is a way to guarantee draws. we need to vote.

SL-Mark: The volcano version would have to have a different set of rules due to the merry go round technique. If i have a 1 and you have a 5 remaining and both of our flags are protected than no side can ever win since you will never be able to capture anything. Having to use a strategic sacrifice in order to get a draw is a thought out plan but boring an opponent is tricky. This where the volcano versions should be ruled differently. I alwayswinsam was a master at this. Those versions simply are flawed/difficult in that you really need to wait for a mistake and be patient. the open versions however will require a rule to prevent an unwinnable situation from going on forever. 50moves in this game would not be practical. we need a different rule. ill put some thought into it. and post a poll

Dark Prince: I am dead set against requesting a site to force a draw situation. That is not fair to all parties. UNLESS the opponent is intentionally stalling for time. If it takes a long time it takes a long time. I have had 400 move games on IYT. There was 1 player that would ask for draws all the time. Classless. But we need to have some sort of rule in place to prevent it. A point rule could be used. BUT never asking for support. This was one of the reasons for a committee. They can rule on such situations. Only an advanced player can really rule on such a situation.

Dark Prince: That would be reasonable since that is the way it pretty much goes in chess. So 50moves without a capture of a piece or depending on having to look at the situation.

lol i see it now.. it would be nice to have known the move number prior to playing through the entire game and stopping on the move it happened. i see it now.

sorry but there is no illegal move in the game celtic jim posted. everything was within the rules.

I'm suffering from a little burnout and have been moving very slowly. plus i have lots of responsibilities at work that are very important. New career = more responsibility.

Mikong: imwith the understanding that you prefer to have a tourney in the small espionage with the volcanoes? if so im in as many other will be. but lets make sure we get the fast players.

Mikong: Welcome to espionage! just to let you know i recently completed a game with sandoz that lasted 321 moves. Since we both moved Quickly it didnt last that long but a match like that could last years. Tourneys aren't suggested for those variants unless Fischer clock is used. Open is the preference here.

SL-Mark: ok thats fine.

it makes a huge difference if you know what pieces are where prior to setup especially with bombs and bases as apposed to moveable pieces. There is a big advantage to the person revealing the bombs. the game totally changes. the same is in chess i guess with an adjournment. so one person dont have too much advantage.

im under the assumption that we know this prior to set up? or do get told where they will be after setup?

we should also make these unrated games as well.

perhaps a mini elimination tourney with this. of course extensive note taking would have to take place and a constant reminder from opp of the location of the pieces.

it would be impossible to win a game with someone having prior knowledge of your bombs for 5 1s being revealed.

your giving a preset value based upon your own piece value system. I consider a Bombs location more valuable, than a 1.

would you give 4 bomb locations for all 5 ones? i certainly wouldnt.

SL-Mark: i would expose the location of a 2 and a 1 and a bomb for both 3s

cookie monster: A 1 and a 2 would be the last pieces i would want to know the location of early. unless it was all of them. the sabs or the 3s and 4s are most important to me for the end game.

ill show you mine if you show me yours! what a quote.. but seriously.. this is more of a philosophical situation. some people value certain pieces more than others. i value the vision of a particular enemy piece...but could care less of where an opp 2s are. in the beginning of the game every piece is assumed to be a recon. unitl something is revealed. as each piece is revealed deduction takes over. but with auto revealing it gives away a lot about a set up position. not sure what im trying to convey but cont think it will be practical for anything but a mentoring/ teaching tool.

There is the option that we can have Fencer have them revealed when the 1st move is made. So that there is no honor system needed.

the suspicious nature of the tourney game in which a draw was taken very early is suspect and i felt that was the case.

Sandoz: As for team tourneys... they are all dependant upon fellowships and they are not as big as i hoped they would be. as per my previous posts i would love to get something like that going.

A great idea would be for us to start up 4 or 5 fellowships and have a large team tourney!

As of now i have had more time to observe some more things about the Fischer clock. currently im in a game with black knight. we started 2 games one with a clock the other without a clock. We started the games on the same day. I moved as fast as possible both of those games. In the one game we are about move 120 and in the other move 15. The games started on april 15. Im still gathering more data, But i do know that a 12 hour clock is not reasonable unlike I had previously thought. 24 hours is barely reasonable.... unless you have a large bank.We all need to beware of auto vacation.

i think i have a partial solution to the fischer clock.Some of us get to set our profile for weekends and wht days will be considered weekends for us. We can do this for time as well. and call it sleep time. no games can time out while it is during your sleep time. im on EST time. and my sleep time hypothetically is 11pm till 7am. in this time frame i cannot time out of any normal game. once it passes this time frame, you start timing out. Right now im starting to experiment with the clock and have timed out of one game due to a misjudgemt in clock management... and due to being very busy. when i gahter more data ill post about my observations.

Dark Prince: point taken...

im concerned about the human error of the "DRAWING" effect of my art work with the "?" and the flaws of the carton squares.

i thought about that.... but i think that the ranks are different arent they. they lack enough of the correct #s.. There are no 1s or Spies for whatever.

I'm curious if anyone has any ideas as to how I can create my own personal Espionage game pieces. The main obstacle here is the trackability of man made pieces. I would love to try and introduce the game to a local chess club or in the skittles rooms of chess tourneys.