Vikings - Thanks

pedestrian - cookie monster will not grab any of your "waiting games" until he has rating :)

Nothingness - I assume you are referring to the draw between Mark and myself in your Open tournament adding to the anecdotal evidence that I am not too "rating-oriented" :)

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

cookie monster: I don't think anybody suspects cheating or anything remotely close to that. People get away with things that are much, much worse (and btw., it's obvious that a professional translator could have done a better job with the different versions of those rules).

cookie monster: you are not flirting with a ban,the reminder was put up more for others who try to cheat. Being as open as you were, it is obvious that you do not fall into that catagory

Thanks for the info. I, apparently, have never read the rules.

I have one game started on this account, and 10 or so on the other, so I guess I am flirting with a ban. On the bright side, I think we call all agree that I have very little interest in my ratings. :)

In any case, I won't start any more games on the other account beyond those assigned to me for tournaments already in progress.

Pedro Martínez: And the German version is even stricter:

Generelle Regeln: (gelten für Spiele und Diskussionsforen)

1. Jeder Spieler auf BrainKing darf nur einen Account haben. Multiple Accounts sind verboten und können zum Ausschluss führen.

[General Rules: (to be applied to games and discussion forums)

1. Each BrainKing player may only have one account. Multiple accounts are prohibited and may lead to a ban.]

Vikings: The Czech version says this:

Základní pravidla: (aplikovaná na celém serveru)

1. Každému hráči je povoleno mít právě jedno registrované konto. Používání více kont stejnou osobou, především za účelem umělého zvyšování hodnocení pomocí úmyslně prohraných her je považováno za nesportovní a podobné chování nebude tolerováno.

[General Rules: (applicable throughout the site)

1. Each user is allowed to have only one registered account. Use of multiple accounts by one person, in particular with the view of boosting ratings by losing games intentionally, shall be regarded as unsportsmanlike, and such conduct shall not be tolerated.]

Now I wonder which version takes precedence?

as long as you are not manipulating your ratings, I don't think it is a big deal

General Guidelines: (rules to be applied throughout the site - in games, discussion boards, tournaments, ponds, stairs, fellowships etc.)

1. Each individual who plays on BrainKing is asked to use one, and only one, BrainKing account. Multiple accounts created for cheating in tournaments, games, ratings, or to get around bans on boards are prohibited.

Chaos:

The name was Mark's idea. :)

I am in two tournaments and my intent, as always, is to finish what I start. Of course, we all know how that has worked out in the past. :)

I use the same email/user id/password for all of my "casual" accounts and whenever I switch computers I just create new accounts. That made a little more sense 10 years ago, but it's just how I do things. :)

I'll be switching to this account in the next day or two. I've been saying that quietly for two weeks, but I might mean it this time.

-johnerichanson, quiet man, argyle socks & happy hermit

Chaos: 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! (/quote)

=> yep, that's the background of my question: Is it worth becoming a paying member? At the moment, I see no reason.
Playing more games simultaneously? Not really
Joining more tournaments simultaneously? Hmm, there aren't many interesting espionage tournaments
Playing other games than espionage? Hmm, for battleboats, poker etc. I would prefer realtime-versions
Perhaps, cool espionage team-tournaments ... :-)

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.

are you guys playing a lot of espionage team tournaments?
Is there anything going on?

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.

Even with the laptops/ipods and playing online, you could use your chess clocks for time control. You would just need to make sure your opponent or anyone possibly in league with your opponent could not see your computer screen.
You might want to experiment to make sure how close to instantaneous a move submitted is before it's available for the opponent to move.
If there is a delay, or for potential connectivity problems, you may add some game time to compensate.

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...

Nothingness:
Doing so will make the game different than the internet/ computer based game since recons would reveal themselves when they reveal anything else. Bring Ipods or laptops and play online.

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

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.

Anyway, back to this Grand Master draw.....

Nothingness:

They are different.  I believe stratego goes 1 to 9 with 8 and 9 matching when spies and saboteurs.  You could get multiple sets, or use stickers over the traditional icons.

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.

Nothingness:

Perhaps you could start with a Stratego set ?

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.

I suddenly find myself with only two interesting games, both of which should wind down quickly.

I disagree with grumpy extrovert.. someone has to, lol.

Dark Prince:

I agree defensive play is more effective here than at IYT.  It is easier to gain complete information which, in turn, makes material relatively more important (and initiative less important).

It's hard to judge how effective one style is compared to another.  Though I think a defensive style is technically better, I doubt it makes a huge difference and I think most players prefer an aggressive style.

I consider myself relatively aggressive, but of the 2000+ rated players I am familiar with only Mark and dAGGER are clearly more defensive than I am.  On the other hand, only pcron and Borg-one were clearly more aggressive.   The rest seem willing to gamble some of the time . . . a poker analogy is probably appropriate here.

happy hermit:
That may be true. I guess I would have to compare my games against defensive players to those against aggressive players. I will concede that at BK defensive play is more effective than at IYT in the corresponding variations due to move tracking.
As far as space is concerned, an aggressive player tends to acquire space for manuevering while the defensive player may end up with very little space for the same. At least that has been my experience.
It could also be that a less skilled/experienced player may do better playing defensively than aggressively. For me though, I don't want to wait for my opponent to make a mistake but would rather attempt to manuever into a superior position from which to attack.

Dark Prince:

I agree with Justaminute in that Sabotage, even the Open variations, favors the defensive player. The pieces don't have the range they do in chess so they can't easily take advantage of the extra space (don't tell Mark, he already thinks space is over-rated :).

That said, like you I am willing to attack, blindly if necessary, to keep the game moving forward in an interesting manner. 

In chess, defensive play can be very effective as long as latent power is developed waiting for the moment to be unleashed.
I agree that defensive play beats an aggressive style in the volcano variations, but not in the open variations. I pull back to regroup on occassion, but typically press the attack from the beginning of the game until the end. I don't play the volcano variations any more because it doesn't suit my style even though I have done relatively well playing those variations as well. Currently, I only play Open Rush and Corner but not here. I have one 3rd round game of Mini going in a tournament I joined by mistake. I expect to lose it fairly soon and be done with that variation for good.

I think chess is a far richer game than espionage allowing a wider variety of styles. In chess the opening is often about the struggle to create a battlefield that accommodates you style, tactical, positional or strategic. In espionage if your goal is victory then allowing your opponent to take the Initiative and counter attacking is the safest course. This only leads to dull long drawn out games however. Such a style would be punished in chess by a player of a similar standard.

For me, there would be no point in playing if I couldn't play aggressively. No doubt, there are times for caution and defense. I would rather lose an exciting game than win a boring game. That isn't to criticize those who play defensively any more than I would criticize someone for preferring vanilla to chocolate. I often take chances, but try to do so in a way that I stand to gain something significant for the risk even if I lose more material than I gain. I have a high winning % playing that way even though in a high percentage of my games I have an early material deficit.
I do so in chess also sometimes making sacrifices without knowing whether the attack it initiates will prove effective.

After about a year or so of experimentation of a new style of game play, ive decided to go back to a different more old fashioned playing style. unfortunately its rather boring but im realizing that the aggressive style i have been experiementing with just isnt me. So i appologize for any future uneventful games you may play vs me. =(

There was a guy who played a lot of mini sabotage on IYT. when you played him he would write to Patrick Chu to for you to make the game a draw when the game got to drawn out. i really hated playing him. we would move fast but the games woud go over 200 moves at a minimum everytime. He was not however a guy who would move slow on purpose. but that is an example of a player that was unhappy with certain aspects of game play.

Nothingness:

The most likely explanation is one or both of the players has several hundred games in progress and they only move on games where they are close to timing out.

Which may be the answer to a fast tournament . . . make it a private tournament and only invite players with a track record of moving fast.

That would be a nice statistic for BrainKing to keep . . . average time per move by game type.

yes its a large espionage touney with 4 sections, all of which are nearly done. Is this a spiteful thing... probably not, people do have lives. but some players are spiteful. some will intentionally move at the last possible moment b/c you do not agree to a setting in particular game. this would be a cause to a slow moving issue.

AbigailII:

I suspect this is a game in a tournament that Nothingness is playing in, but not  a game Nothingness is playing.

Abigailll: True but pedantic.

Nothingness: so basically they have moved 2x per month

Uhm, "they"? You know your opponent could have written exactly the same? If your opponent moves twice a month, it means you move twice a month as well.

i was just searching through my current tourneys and noticed that there is a game that is only on move 10 and the tourney started on Dec30. so basically they have moved 2x per month. WOW.. at that rate this round wont be over for another year or two.

Nothingness: I love the idea of a teamtournament. But we do have the problem that pawns can't enter the fellowships...

Many years ago there was a proposal made to the sabotage members to organize a league. i think that with the current members here we can organize. but perhaps with a twist. there is an option hre for team vs teams. perhaps we can have a team of 3 or 4 players and have a leauge. We can use the fellowships to make these challenges. We can have a draft lottery by a number of captains and. choose up teams . this i feel can spawn interest here just like it did on IYT.