 |
|
 EspionageFor all Espionage fans Sinulla ei ole oikeutta kirjoittaa tälle alueelle. Tälle alueelle kirjoittamiseen vaadittu minimi jäsenyystaso on Brain-Sotilas. Moodi: Kaikki voivat lähettää viestejä
<< < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > >> 8. Marraskuu 2009, 19:49:26 Thank you Abigaill :) We're discussing tournaments of espionage variants with specific settings though. 8. Marraskuu 2009, 19:37:55 Otsikko: Re: Agenda SL-GentleKiller: I run a daily tournament, in all games, so it's not hard to find a tourney starting soon. 8. Marraskuu 2009, 19:15:43 Otsikko: Re: Agenda I want a tourney asap. 8. Marraskuu 2009, 18:39:31 Otsikko: Agenda 1 New tournament. Do we want a new tournament to start in the next few months? In that case we have to solve issues like: what variant, how to set up the tournament, etc. If we postpone it we can leave the discussion till later and the pawns might be free to enter a tournament in the BK frame. Maybe there could be an unofficial fast tournament for members who can't wait. My question: who wants a new tournament soon? 2 The 'Italian disguise'. Do we want to leave it like it is and ask Fencer to state it clearly in the rules, or do we want to have it changed? Fencer doesn't see it as a bug, but evenso we can ask for a change in the rule. 3 The League. Since we're playing espionage at BK now, do we stick to the name Sabotage League or do we change it so BK members understand what we are talking about? Also, as a moderator I can change the discussionboard subheader 'Discuss about Espionage games or find new opponents.' into something else, redfrog suggested me to do this. For example we could change it into 'Home of the Sabotage League (or whatever we'll decide to call it), all Espionage fans welcome.'. Do come with comments and suggestions! I can even make a subsubheader. I can't change the title. 7. Marraskuu 2009, 04:47:37 Otsikko: Re: Draw Chaos: We had each ID'd most of the other's pieces, and our material was close to even. Strategically it seemed unlikely that either one of us would be sure to force our way through to the enemy HQ or to gain a decisive advantage. Additionally, it seemed our schedules didn't coincide well for making many moves per day and there was only one other incomplete game in the round. We can do battle again. Jared 7. Marraskuu 2009, 00:07:52 Otsikko: Re: S-B Dark Prince: I'm puzzled. Why did you and Thom agree to a draw? The game doesn't look finished at to me all. Those who'll go to round 2 of Open Fast #1 are known (indeed you and Thom are both in) and only 1 game to finish. I'm curious who'll be my opponents in the second round. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 19:30:58 Otsikko: S-B It appears that the players highlighted in yellow advance to the next round. It looks like round 2 will have 2 sections of 4 players each if the S-B calculates Thom and me to be even. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 17:58:05 Otsikko: Re: Rule Nuances Dark Prince: For viewing previous moves I open a second tab or window to do so. That way I can still move directly on one board without extra clicks. I don't keep notes in the browser but the second window would solve that as well. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 17:49:32 Otsikko: Re: Rule Nuances lukulus: I was stating personal preferences. Whether here or at IYT, the nuances can be used to acquire advantages and win games. Viewing previous moves here is much more cumbersome than at IYT, and the private notes disappear here when viewing any previous move. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 15:04:29 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? dAGGER: Perhaps we can delegate some of the duties in a hybrid tournament? Perhaps have a player in each of the the 'pawn sections' responsible for reporting the results? A full tournament can last two years (10 years if we play a volcano variant and dAGGER and Mark are in the same section) and that's a lot of time to be limited from playing in other events if you are a pawn. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 14:32:49 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? dAGGER: try six month rook  Its not so expensive. As knight or bishop you cant play two tournaments in same game in same time.6. Marraskuu 2009, 14:08:14 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? happy hermit: I agree a Hybrid tournament is still a big job for the volunteer administrator. As a brain pawn, if I can't join next League event, I will pay for 3 months or give it up! 6. Marraskuu 2009, 14:02:45 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Mark: I consider this a bug. However, if it is well described in the game rules, I can accept to keep it as it is now. Fencer gave his opinion that this is not a bug, but he did not promise to update the game rules. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 13:58:47 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? Chaos: I agree it's sub-optimal, but I can't think of an option that is better. :) 6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:46:00 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? happy hermit: 'It could be a hybrid tournament. I.e., set up single section tournaments on BK for those that have a free tournament slot (all non-pawns, pawns not in any other tournaments) and group the other pawns in section(s) outside the brainking framework.' This is still a lot of work, because the organisor of the tournament will have to check on the single section tournaments and all the individual pawn games. If we grow bigger there will be several rounds afterwards. All individual games will have to be checked in those. Plus it will be strange to have the pawns always playing against pawns in the first round. This will likely give uneven sections in numbers and skills. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:36:37 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? Resher: Welcome on board! :) Hope to see you join the next tournament. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:35:03 Otsikko: Re: bugs and the 3 hits hinder Sandoz: The 3 hits hinder is indeed extremely annoying. I think I remember people already complaining about this way back and that Fencer had answered it was the way it worked here. Isn't it the same in other games? 6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:11:15 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? SL-Bosse: I also read this board, but am waiting until my total number of games is more under control before joining in these espionage games more 6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:00:08 I read but don't often comment 6. Marraskuu 2009, 09:22:01 Otsikko: Re: Reading... Dark Prince: I agree with graphic, but dont agree with rule nuances. Such nuance can win a game. 6. Marraskuu 2009, 03:12:21 Otsikko: Re: Reading... SL-Bosse: The message board feature and rating system are attractive to me here, but I can't say I care much for the game graphics or rule nuances. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 22:11:42 Otsikko: Re: bugs SL-GentleKiller: 3 hits That's definetely a usability issue that should get fixed! 5. Marraskuu 2009, 20:23:39 Sandoz summed it nicely I thought "And I consider it a quite logical thing, that a recon reveals every piece until the recon gets killed" ba boom 5. Marraskuu 2009, 20:04:41 Josef said, in paraphrase"...When I hit the link for previouse move, first there's a need to hit it 3 times to show the position as it was before the actual one. More than that, when I come back to the last position - using the link for the next move - I can't make a move, there's no "hand". So I have to hit somewhere on a move in the list of moves, than click the last move on the list" oh boy that is so annoying and illogical,well said that man 5. Marraskuu 2009, 19:44:52 Otsikko: Re: bugs happy hermit: It's not possible to move two pieces to the same square. The order of the five moves it's very important regarding the possible side-effects, such as the formerly mentioned revealing issue, but there are many others. However, the final result of the five moves is generated as they were made simultaneosly, not one after another. I'm not sure of this, but it's very likely... 5. Marraskuu 2009, 19:28:44 Otsikko: Re: bugs SL-GentleKiller: Oddly, I've played a game or two at IYT and never had an inkling of this. Also, I don't find it particularly logical considering that other moves on a turn are considered simultaneous (e.g. you can't move two pieces to the same square even if one of them will disappear in an attempted capture.) Still, just being aware of it helps and I can think of a position where the problem can't be solved by move order. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 19:21:50 Otsikko: bugs I'm wondering so many guys didn't know about this issue of revealing. As Jim said, it was discussed at IYT. I'm neutral regarding it, but we have to admit, it has its logic, more than that, it could be very difficult to modify the algorithm, b/c, if we think well, there would be a need to implement an illogical or ambiguouse rule, otherwise should be treted as an exception, that also gives headache to programmers. This is what bothers me: When I hit the link for previouse move, first there's a need to hit it 3 times to show the position as it was before the actual one. More than that, when I come back to the last position - using the link for the next move - I can't make a move, there's no "hand". So I have to hit somewhere on a move in the list of moves, than click the last move on the list. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 19:21:20 I agree with Sandoz. Don´t know about this "rule" before, but when I catch pieces I ever catch the recon first, because I thought he will demask my piece before he gets killed. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 19:16:49 Otsikko: Re: Reveal Bug SL-Mark: Hi everyone, to me it does not seem like a bug. I know this from iyt. And I consider it a quite logical thing, that a recon reveals every piece until the recon gets killed. Even within a move of your opponent. Nevertheless, one should clearly write it down in the rules of the game to avoid any disadvantages for newer players. If there are any new players .... ;-) 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:55:27 Otsikko: Re: Styleone: I suspect we will debate that at some future point. :) In the meantime we could have our own two player tournament if you like. :) 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:52:49 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? Chaos: It could be a hybrid tournament. I.e., set up single section tournaments on BK for those that have a free tournament slot (all non-pawns, pawns not in any other tournaments) and group the other pawns in section(s) outside the brainking framework. This lets everyone play, plus we can start the second round as soon as the first is decided and don't have to wait on everyone of Mark's 200 move games. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:36:58 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? Muokannut SL-Bosse (6. Marraskuu 2009, 11:46:11) Chaos: It should have been "I think it is to early to start up next "official" Sabotage Leauge-tournament" It should be intresting to know how many players are reading this Board, and not writing anything. So everyone who is reading, but not writing. Just give a sign here or by an PM. Following is active here:
5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:27:45 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? SL-Bosse: "I think it is to early to start up an "official" Sabotage Leauge-tournament. I think we should wait until January/February. Or at least the "Small Fast #1" should be finished. Or what do You think?" You mean to say Small fast #1 and Open Fast #1 are not official ?  Just when I made it to the second round after sleepless nights with questionmarks haunting me...Ok, now serious, I agree the pawns should be able to enter every tournament. it's just soooo much trouble to get a tournament going outside the framework. The BrainKing framework is perfect. I've organised several tournament when we were still at IYT and it really is a lot of work. It's more than administration. Players have to be seeded, there has to be checked whether the games have started, whether games have ended, what the outcome is etc etc. Players even forget a game is a tournament game. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:25:14 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Bosse: Link to the bug. http://brainking.com/en/ReadBug?bgi=1959 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:18:49 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Mark: I vote for that it is a bug, and should be fixed. Is it anyone who knows how to put up a poll here? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:17:02 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise Chaos: Chaos: I did mention to Fencer that we are having a discussion about it on the Espionage board, so as you suggest, all views put forward will be seen by Fencer, and perhaps he will change as a feature request? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 18:03:02 which variant we play in the next league tournament? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:59:18 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Bosse: That would be a great name for the next tournament!  5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:55:54 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Mark: We could still make a request for a change. If we do this as a group we have more chance of succeeding I guess. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:51:17 Otsikko: The Italian Disguise From: Fencer (show this user's messages) Date and time: 5. November 2009, 15:23:23 Subject: Bug #1959 has been updated Archive Do not reply to this message! If you want to post a new comment, please go to this bug page. Title: Espionage reveal bug Comment author: Fencer Status changed to "not a bug". No, that's how it is played here. The order of moves matters. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:47:29 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? happy hermit: I don't think so. But it can be an good idea. But then we need someone to administrate it. Just another question: As a "Pawn" you can not be member of a Fellowship? Or?
5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:44:25 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? SL-Bosse: Has there been any discussion about holding a tournament outside the brainking tournament framework? I.e., the tournament pairings are posted elsewhere as we did in the past. This would be so 'pawns' are not excluded? . 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:43:51 Otsikko: Re: The Italian Disguise SL-Mark: We can start a nice "non-leauge" tournament called "The Italian Disguise"? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:37:32 Otsikko: The Italian Disguise Muokannut SL-Mark (5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:38:06) dAGGER: I think we can name this bug as "The Italian Disguise" I had to mention it, the game is so critical now that it would be cheating not to say anything. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:35:40 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? dAGGER: But can you as a Pawn enter a new tournament before it is finished? Or is it only to ask Fencer to fix it if you are out from the tournament? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:34:38 Otsikko: Re: Reveal Bug happy hermit: Me too. It was quite a surprise to see dAGGER's piece, one that he probably really did not want to show. An Italian disguise :) 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:31:13 Otsikko: Re: Reveal Bug Chaos: Agree, it has nothing to do with the skill involved in playing the game. I have already listed it as a bug, saying that the piece movement order should make no difference whether the recon is captured first or last within the move. 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:30:41 Otsikko: Re: Next Tournament? SL-Bosse: I look forward to a new league event, as I'm already out of the current ones! :-) 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:28:45 Otsikko: Next Tournament? It's nice to see that it starts to be a discussion on this board. The level of the discussion is a nice mix of jokes, hints and other stuff. It's starts to look how it was in IYT in the old days. I think it is to early to start up an "official" Sabotage Leauge-tournament. I think we should wait until January/February. Or at least the "Small Fast #1" should be finished. Or what do You think? 5. Marraskuu 2009, 17:28:11 Otsikko: Re: Reveal Bug SL-Mark: thank you for admitting it! I didn't know about this matter, that is a bug for me. I think we should ask to fix it or at least to explain it in the game rules. << < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 > >> |
Päivämäärä ja aika
Ystävät palvelimella
Suosikki keskustelut
Yhteisöt
Päivän vinkki
|
|
Tekijänoikeudet - Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, kaikki oikeudet pidätetään. Takaisin alkuun |