AbigailII: Sounds like it. I wish Fencer would *** *** **** *** ** *** *** and implement something like that here.

AbigailII: 30/2/30 would give you what you want, but then I'd be stuck in a tournament that could take quite a while. I don't think there's a common ground. The suggestion for more than one tournament with different time settings is probably the best solution.

AbigailII: Have you tried something like 3/2/30? You'd start with three days to play the game, but every time you made a move, you'd add two days to that total. Assuming you made a move every day for a while, you'd build up extra time up to the max of 30 days. Then you could take a long vacation.

Chaos: I can totally understand how you wouldn't want a max time for the whole game, but I feel the exact opposite!

Friends: You can get past the issues you have with Fischer's clock settings by adjusting the bonus you get for each move. For example, if the settings are 7/1/7, then you get an extra day each time you make a move, so you'll always have at least one day to make your move, regardless of how quickly your opponent moves.

I like the suggestion of some fast and some slow paced tourneys. One size probably won't fit all here and there's no reason to try and force that. ;-)

SL-Bosse: I STRONGLY recommend that you use the Fischer clock. It might be a bit more of a challenge to get the right settings for espionage than for other games, but it really hleps keep the tournaments from dragging on and on and on.

AbigailII: I agree that to play at a high level requires improvements to the BK interface. I'm sure that keeps many players from playing (or playing more games) here. I know that limits my playing. I end up playing other games more.

One suggestion is to cater to the beginners. Make some tournaments for them. Offer to hlep them become better players and make them feel part of the community. A few of them will get hooked and become good players.

Tian-Xian: If you have finished all your games in a tournament and if you will not advance to the next round, then you can ask Fencer nicely and he will usually let you out of that tournament so you can enter another.

Nothingness: Did you mean this game?
Small Fast Espionage (Thad vs. Nothingness)

The bonus was too low for Espionage.

Nothingness: What were the settings?

SL-Mark: Yes it does, but if no one can use any vacation days at all then a lot of players won't play in those tournaments.

So to ask an open question...
How long should an Espionage game take to complete at the longest? A month? More?

Chaos: There is no way to limit how much vacation a player can use. It's all or nothing. Too bad Fencer can't (or won't) program BK so that the game/tournament creator can limit how many vacation days a player can use in any one game/tournament. That's one of the things that keeps this site from being good.

I am currently stuck in a tournament where my opponent has burned thru more than 80 vacation days and hasn't moved since March 3rd!! I absolutely, positively will not play in any tournament that doesn't use Fischer's clock.

Brian1971: Here's a link:
My 3rd Espionage Tournament

TheFadingX: Espionage is basically Stragego. Check it out here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratego

I'm ranked 6th in Fast Espionage, 6th in Small Espionage, and 6th (provisional) in Espionage. 666...should I be concerned?! ;-)

I think that would take forever, but multiplayer small espionage might be good. Also, with a pyramid starting setup, almost everyone would put their castle in the middle of the bottom row. I think a setup similar to now would be better because it would bting out more creativity in starting setups. Overall, I still like the idea.

Hrqls: What would the starting layout be. It would be easy to attack/hard to defend pieces close to the corners of the board. Would you still use a square board? Or one shaped like a plus sign? Just some thoughts. ;-)

I haven't played in a while and I just made my first capture since the upgrade. I see the captured piece, right there and I don't have to take notes about it. Yay!!!

Nothingness: But there's no reason not to show a record of pieces that have been captured, especially the known ones. Use a question mark for unknown pieces if you must, but put up a list. Computers are great at keeping track of stuff for us. Let's make the game better by letting it do this menial task for us. You can still use notes for things like losing a capture attempt to a higher piece and other details that the better players record but that novices do not.

joshi tm: Good question. I've asked this before, but never gotten a straight answer.

I think you should find out the rank of any piece you capture.
Other players think it should remain unknown (unless you've spied it). Programming for known and unknown pieces could be difficult. Other than that, I know of no reason that they are not displayed. I keep a list in my private notes for each game, but that's a big pain in the ass, which is the main reason I don't play more.

DragonKing: Seems to me that the attacking piece should win when equal pieces are involved.

Nothingness: Here's a link: ;-)

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=12181&trnst=0&tp=55

Hrqls: Becasue there are more pieces that can kill 5s than there are that can kill 4s, so in some sense, the 4s are stronger.

M132T003C: Higher numbers always beat lower numbers. Attacking piece wins when pieces are equal. Think of spies and sappers as 'zeros'. In addition to the above capture rules, sappers win when attacking 5s. Sappers also deactivate bombs.

Nothingness: If I move zero on a turn, and you do the same on your next turn, then I say I'd be required to move at least one on my next turn. No indefinite stalling. I could sit there an not move for as many turns as I wanted if you kept moving, but if you wanted to force me to move, you'd be able to.

BIG BAD WOLF: Why limit it to 10? I see no reason.

Entering moves could get to be a pain, especially if you decide you did something you don't like and want to start all over.

How about a version where you can move as many (or as few) pieces as you want on any turn. Comments?

AbigailII: I don't think I can, if he knows which piece is my 5 and that the others are no threat to him.

The player & I have already drawn that game, so there is no harm in speaking of it now.

pauloaguia: I know that. The question is, can that position be forced upon him?

I have a game where my opponent has only a 5 left. His castle is surrounded by bombs. I have a 5, a 4, & a 3, but no minesweepers. Is it a draw? Or is there some way for me to corner him?

Thanks, Fencer.

Fencer, could you change the name of this DB to Espionage instead of Espionage, Small Espionage and Fast Espionage? Since the merger of several game DBs, the others (Pente for example) are now named after only the main game. I would like to see this one done that was too. ;-)

Fencer,

On the set-up screen of each Espionage (and small & fast) board could the Load Position radio button be turned on by default, please.

Backgammonfan28: In a five-vs-sapper attack, the attacker wins. Are you getting sappers mixed up with spies? Just a guess.

Nothingness: Only a *sapper* (minesweeper) can capture a 5. ;-)

Looks like new rules are in effect for all Espionage games:
All mobile pieces can move one space horizontally or vertically. The piece cannot return to its previous position in the next turn, a different move must be done first.

I am fairly new to the game. Can someone please explain what is wrong with moving back and forth on consecutive turns?

I like that idea a lot. Room for everybody. The guys who like the added challenge of having to keep track can do so in Espionage and we can have our captured pieces list in Small or Fast (or whatever combo works). :-D

But I don't want to track pieces and take notes and all that. Let the computer do it. I want to play games!! ;-)

Fencer,

We NEED a captured pieces section. Giving us that information does not change the game. All it does is let the computer collect data for us that it already known. There is one for Chess & Pente, why not one for Espionage? Please, I am begging!!! ;-)

IYT sucks in more ways than I can count.

I'm in. Here's a link.

You can move back, then forward, just not forward then back.

ItsYourTurn.com sucks. Their customer service is non-existant, their 'upgrades' are usually downgrades, etc. I have nothing nice to say about them or the guy, Patrick Chu, who owns the site. I hope they go out of business.

I know that mines stay on the board unless removed by a sapper. But wouldn't the game be better if they were removed when any piece encounters one? In other words, if a piece (other than a sapper) steps on a mine, the piece is removed AND the mine is also removed. This would make the game more challenging. Also, the way it is now, if you lose all your sappers and your opponent has his HQ surrounded, you can't win.

Well, looks like we were wrong about our assumptions on volcano placement. I had thought that they were always placed symetrically with respect to your opponent. In other words, if you looked at the board upside down, the volcanos were in the same places. But that's not the case. Take a look at this board. The volcanos are not symetrically placed.

Fencer, perhaps you can enlighten us on what volcano positions are possible, please? ;-)

Thad

BBW, a capture should reveal exactly what was captured. After all, it's a battle and to the victor go the spoils.

You should definately know what you captured. A captured pieces board would solve that. It would provide enough information to make the game more fun without giving away anything to make the game less fun.

There should at least be a captured pieces pile like in chess.

Fencer, you are AWESOME!!

Mahalo (Hawaiian thanks),
Thad

I had to look up the proper spelling for the plural of 'volcano' since I've used it two different ways here myself! Looks like both 'volcanos' and 'volcanoes' are both acceptable, at least according to dictionary.com. ;-)