Chaos:
Though I agree bugs should be fixed/eliminated, if the rule is that identification by spies can occur on the move the spy is captured (but prior to the capture within that move), it is not a bug. Furthermore, knowledge of the identification would be available through the move list by seeing what was adjacent to the square occupied by the spy prior to its capture. That would be the case for an unidentified spy that is revealed later as well.

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.

Chaos:
"A Spy reveals an identity of all enemy pieces which are currently located one space next to its own position (horizontally, vertically or diagonally). Once a piece is "unmasked", it stays visible for the opponent to the end of the game. Such situation can happen either when a Spy moves next to enemy pieces or if a piece moves next to enemy Spy"

It seems to me, that a "move" is not the same as a "turn."
That being the case, it could be argued that it is implied that the existing state of identification as specified in the message by Thom27 complies with the rule above (copied and pasted from the rules). The word "currently" in the first sentence of the rule, certainly doesn't imply the end of the turn but does at least seem to imply the end of the move.

I agree that rules should be clear and unambiguous. I would argue, however, that many rules fail that test more blatantly than this one.

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.

Nothingness: Moves cannot be simultanous, because you can move one of your pieces to a spot another piece of yours moved out of in the same turn. So indeed we should see it as a sequel of moves.

Chaos:
I agree this is not a bug, but the rules should explain this point in a clear way.

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.

Chaos:
I agree that individual moves within a turn cannot be viewed as simultaneous since one piece vacating a square allows another piece to subsequently move to that square the same turn.
As such, it is consistent for a spy to identify a piece moved adjacent to it prior to its capture that same turn. It is also consistent for a spy to move adjacent to a previously unidentified piece, another piece capture that one subsequently the same move and that captured piece show up upon submittal in the capture list with its identity revealed.

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.

Chaos:
Current Wording:
Spies: A Spy reveals an identity of all enemy pieces which are currently located one space next to its own position (horizontally, vertically or diagonally). Once a piece is "unmasked", it stays visible for the opponent to the end of the game. Such situation can happen either when a Spy moves next to enemy pieces or if a piece moves next to enemy Spy. A Spy can capture only another Spy or a Sapper and dies when steps on a Mine.

Proposed Wording:
Spies: A Spy reveals the identities of all previously unidentified enemy pieces which are moved adjacent to its location or whose location is adjacent to the square to which the Spy is moved. This includes movement within a turn in which either that Spy is subsequently captured after a masked piece moves adjacent to it or a masked piece is subsequently captured after a Spy is moved adjacent to it. "Adjacent" means abbutting horizontally, vertically or diagonally. The identities of unmasked enemy pieces are shown upon submission of the turn and remain visible either on the board or in the capture list for the rest of the game. A Spy can capture only another Spy, a Sapper or the Headquarters and dies when it steps on a Mine or Ranked Soldier. A Spy can be captured by any enemy piece that steps on it.

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

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.

Chaos: If the pieces move at the same speed the front piece is vacating the square at the same speed the new piece is entering it and the moves occur at the same time. For example take cars in a road, the car behind does not wait for the front car to have moved before it moves. It relies on the fact by going at the same speed the car will have vacated by the time it gets there.

Justaminute: within the move you have to move the first piece before you can place the second at the spot it vacated though. That makes it a sequel of moves, I think.

Chaos:
Several things demonstrate that the moves within a turn are sequential rather than simultaneous. The move list shows the order of moves and vacating a square must occur prior to another piece occupying it, but I agree that these do not definitively eliminate the simultaneous move possibility. I don't care for the analogy of cars moving on a road since continuous movement doesn't reflect a turn based game. When vehicles in a particular lane start from a traffic signal turning green, in reality, they do not all start moving at the same time except in some cartoons. So that analogy demonstrates sequential better than it does simultaneous moves.
The existing state of spy identification as described in previous messages clearly demonstrates that moves within a turn are not simultaneous, but are in fact sequential.

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)