Reading through all posts, we have the following subjects mentioned (no particular order):

1. Unfair advantage issue with the non random placement of volcanos in tournaments (
2. Difficulty of viewing pieces due to smallness of the size of the rank numbers
3. A wish for some sort of tally of pieces captured. Several different opinions there
4. Wish for a change on the way moves are notated,so the "switch" would be possible (one for, one against so far)
5. No Volcanos. Perhaps another variation

I think all of the above do influence the way the game is played. I pesent this recap so people can voice their opinion on items on the list above or add to it. Some tally can be kept and then presented to Fencer. Some more "traffic" may be needed on this discussion board, before any requestsare "officialy" presented.

Reading through all posts, we have the following subjects mentioned (no particular order):

1. Unfair advantage issue with the non random placement of volcanos in tournaments (
2. Difficulty of viewing pieces due to smallness of the size of the rank numbers
3. A wish for some sort of tally of pieces captured. Several different opinions there
4. Wish for a change on the way moves are notated,so the "switch" would be possible (one for, one against so far)
5.

Good point.
In retrospect, my comment "does not make much difference to the game in the long run" was made with the full version in mind.
From playing a similar small version on another site, I will agree that advance knowledge of the volcano placement, could at times give too much of an advantage on the small version. It would be allowing that person the chance to not only establish position within the opponents territory, but also restrict the opponents ability for movement. Very important in the mini, ...err, small version.

If what you say is accurate and if only one of two opponents knows about it, it could then give a mobility advantage at the early stages of the game to the one that knows about the setup. While on one hand I believe that such a situation should be corrected, on the other hand I think that it does not make much difference to the game in the long run.

I agree that the numbers, and more so with the black pieces, are hard to see. On a quick glance a 4 and a 1 look the same.

With the move notations listing origin and destination on all moves, it eliminates one important type of move, found on variations of this game elsewhere. It is the ability to play the "switch"
Say the relative value of one important piece has been determined by your opponent ( not revealed, just determined. Example your 4 was blindly attacked by a 3. Opponent lost a 3 , and now has determined the value of your piece at 4 or greater)
I am not too good in describing how it is done, however here it is:
In a 4 square area, A1,A2,B1,B2, you have the one piece on one corner( say a1) and the other at the opposite corner( B2)(both must be pieces not revealed by a spy). One turn passes where these do not move, then each piece moves to one of the other corners. Now the opponent is not sure where the piece has moved to.


As I said, the move notation given, unfortunately eliminates the ability to do this.
I would like to suggest that the notation be simplified so that the "switch" may become possible.

Lomeinka