Jump to content


Photo

Autodraw


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
72 replies to this topic

Poll: Autodraw Poll (49 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you believe we need an Autodraw feature? If so how many moves to declare the game a draw (Meaning both sides making a move to count as a move total)?

  1. No - It should be up to the players involved to decide when a game should end (13 votes [26.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.53%

  2. Yes - 100 moves (4 votes [8.16%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.16%

  3. Yes - 200 moves (21 votes [42.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.86%

  4. Yes - 300 moves (9 votes [18.37%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.37%

  5. Yes - But I believe it should be a different number of moves not listed here (Explain) (2 votes [4.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.08%

Vote

#1 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 30 March 2014 - 07:49 PM

From a previous post about using ISF rules or not, there appears to be gathering acceptance of the idea of having an autodraw feature in place if both sides can't or won't make progress and no capture has been made after so many moves.  

 

Whether we agree to ISF or not, I believe autodraw is still needed because, ISF rules does not go over what happens if one player has a Major and other other a Captain left and both have flags either that are sealed or uncertainty which one is it out of a number of bombs remaining.  An Autodraw will prevent one player from abusing the game by endless chasing around the lake in hopes the other will quit and gaining an unfair win.  

 

The question now is...first do you agree to the idea of an autodraw feature and if so how many moves without a capture do you believe is fair to declare a game a draw?   If you agree with autodraw but, disagree to my listed 100, 200 or 300 moves (this is both players making a move to count as a move) then what do you believe is a fair number?  

 

My vote is 200 moves, I believe is more than fair and a players if they feel have some way to win the game, can mount an attack within that many moves.  



#2 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,270 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:03 PM

We have discuss this issue and in the past if I remember well and the conclusion is that we really need to have an auto draw system.

This will give many solutions and will prevent the action of tie refusals and also stalling

200 moves is an ideal number



#3 Luckypapa

Luckypapa

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Major

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:06 PM

I like the idea of an autodraw, but it is difficult to say how many moves I want to vote for. If the game is in the beginstadium 100 moves is to less and when both players have only one of two pieces left or the flag is sealed by bombs and there are no miners left, 100 moves is to much. 

But it also can happen that one player has the higher pieces, but he needs more then 100 moves to capture all moving piece of the opponent.

I know it is to much asked to implement different autodraw options, but that would be the most useful.

Maybe it is possible to try the diffent options before definitive implementation.

 

If I have to vote, I go for 200 moves.

 

Lucky


The secret of happiness is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you should do.


#4 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:06 PM

Yes  Karaiskakis, we concluded many times in the past, but there was no real push.  I would like to see this issue finalized and have Ash be given clear instructions on what the players want and to see to if the site can get this done.



#5 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:12 PM

 

But it also can happen that one player has the higher pieces, but he needs more then 100 moves to capture all moving piece of the opponent.

 

If a capture has been made Lucky, the counter would reset.  I am talking if NO capture has been made in X number of moves would the game end.  



#6 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,951 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:44 PM

Please look at my posts in the "game rules" forum. Autodraw shall be given only when:

a) At least one of the players wants to end the game in a draw (= if both players want to continue the game autodraw shall not apply) and

b ) The situation of the game shall be a clear draw => the system/software shall be made in such a way that it will automatically recognize if a game is a draw or not (assuming none of the players will make a mistake).

 

if the 2 above conditions are satisfied the system/software shall automatically activate an "autodraw" button that the player willing to end the game in a draw can click on to end the game. So there is no need to wait 100 or 200 moves or whatever to activate an autodraw. As soon as a game is recognized as beeing a draw it will be enabled.

 

Napoleon 1er


If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...


#7 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 30 March 2014 - 08:51 PM

That is fine Napoleon, if you wish to add the stipulation that both players want to continue the game, then it shall continue until next X number of moves appear with no capture been met and question comes up again.  IF one of the two players refuse to continue the game, the game ends as a draw.  



#8 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,455 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 30 March 2014 - 09:40 PM

We should not separate auto-draw from a blocking of double chasing (leaving aside the defending the flag case).  The reason is that if we implement auto-draw right now then a player could use chasing as a tactic to obtain a draw.  Auto-draw and blocking of multiple chasing therefore need to be implemented together.  I agree with the 200 move limit.  If you are using a high piece to keep an opponent's high piece to one side of the board and it is just moving around the lake, you may only get to make one or two moves for every 10 total moves spent tracking your opponent's high piece.  Therefore it could take a large number of moves to be able to mount an attack.  Also, there should be a move counter displayed during the game at all times so a player could be aware if the game is nearing a draw.  



#9 Roondy Moose

Roondy Moose

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 30 March 2014 - 09:43 PM

No need to wait until the double-chase issue is resolved before implementing autodraw. You are not going to win that game anyway. Do you really want to spend hours being chased in the hopes of winning the game?

Then we can get the chasing issue resolved when people stop being insane and fighting against it.


Love is a losing game.


#10 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,951 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 March 2014 - 10:03 PM

I voted "Yes - but I believe it should be a different number of moves not listed here (please explain)" => my explanation is already made clear ... see my last post above.

 

Napoleon 1er


If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...


#11 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 30 March 2014 - 10:40 PM

Napoleon, you made a valid point about that both players should agree to continue the game if X number moves happen, but what do you believe is the number of moves needed for the question to be asked?



#12 maribo

maribo

    Sergeant

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Marshal

Posted 31 March 2014 - 03:17 AM

1. Players should decide if there is a draw or not.

2. Games should be operated by a reasonable timer for which the game would end in a draw.

 

Software changes are necessary for #2.

If adopting a number of moves I would agree with if neither side takes or gives up a piece for either 

a) x amount of time goes by where neither side has surrended a piece or taken a piece - both sides together for a period of 20 minutes.

b.) Neither side has surrended or takent a piece - both sides together for 200 moves. Option b should be adjusted to become averaged out to be a 20 minute time with beta testing.



#13 maribo

maribo

    Sergeant

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Marshal

Posted 31 March 2014 - 04:48 AM

The timer is really the solution. If you put in a class of games that invoke a timer, then those players who are skittish of playing an endless game and "fear" their opponent will pull 15 whole points out of their holier than thou ranking for which we all pride ourselves in saying we don't care about , but openly lie, than if they care so much about that fear of playing that unsportsmanlike player once ever 20 games where that player may steal a win from him because he has to go to bed or go to work and cant stay in the game for 3 hours (i am one such victim), than put in a class of timer games.

 

The rest of us, including me, will live by the way things are.

You click ranked,

you click timer game or no timer game.

You click your options of the timer.

45 minute timer, 

75 minute timer

The timer of the game is separate for the players timer. The game timer does not start moving until the personal timer has moved 5 seconds. So as things are now if you used all 15 seconds to move the game timer would drop 10 seconds.

Consider gravon, consider changing the 15 second personal timer to 8 or 10.



#14 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,265 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 31 March 2014 - 05:05 AM

The most elegantly beautiful option, in my opinion, is to just have the audio draw kick in right from the opening move of the game. If at any point 200 moves (100 per each player) occurs without a capture for either player, the game will end in an auto draw. Yes, a move counter would be important. But since I am asking for this counter to record moves right from the beginning and for it to get reset with every capture, it would be annoying, I think, to have it appear prior to, say, 100 total moves have been played. At that point the counter appears in an out of the way place on the screen in a modest but not garish size. Perhaps, like the current move timer does when it reaches 5 seconds, it could turn red in the final 50 total moves between the two players, and even flash in the final 10. This 200 move number could be tweaked if need be after testing.

I see a lot of people balking at the idea of the 200 as potentially being too long and would only serve to drag out a game. To those people I say that the auto draw proposal is designed to stop the worst of offenders first--those persons who will play for hours in a pointless game and the other player just gives up to escape. It is not meant to address every possible situation imaginable. If you want it to somehow act differently when no miners are present, or to be a maximum of 20 minutes in its action, then you'll have to settle for less than you would like with this rule. But if you're tired of playing games that go on nightmarishly long due to the worst of opponents, then this could help you.

I would toss out for consideration that with an auto draw in place we might just see bad behavior players stop trying to "wait out" their opponents because everyone would know the auto draw is coming.

Back in the day it was often put that we should couple the auto draw with a chasing rule so that the two would work complimentarily to one another. It was a good thought. But we didn't get that. When we got the HmmNess chasing rule we did not pass the auto draw with it. Now we have a discussion going for getting double chasing stopped. This, too, could be combined with the auto draw, and it would be appropriate, although not essential, to once again try to do both rules simultaneously. The Prof has brought this up in this thread again.

Napoleon 1 er has mentioned a couple of times in different places that we should have an agreement as to whether both players want an auto draw. This really misses the point of the rule in question because the auto draw is for precisely the situation where people are NOT TALKING. If both players are civil then they shouldn't have a problem with this auto draw proposal, as it is one that ends the game after a fairly long time... and players are ALWAYS able to end their game sooner if they so agree.

Finally, maribo has talked about getting a total time game clock going, because the time of 200 moves is so variable. Perhaps this kind of rule could be added later but it would be nice to see auto draw in action by itself, or maybe in tandem with the double chasing rule, for awhile first.

Gary
The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#15 maribo

maribo

    Sergeant

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Marshal

Posted 31 March 2014 - 05:52 AM

 

The most elegantly beautiful option, in my opinion, is to just have the auto draw kick in right from the opening move of the game. If at any point 200 moves (100 per each player) occurs without a capture for either player, the game will end in an auto draw. Yes, a move counter would be important. But since I am asking for this counter to record moves right from the beginning and for it to get reset with every capture, it would be annoying, I think, to have it appear prior to, say, 100 total moves have been played. At that point the counter appears in an out of the way place on the screen in a modest but not garish size. Perhaps, like the current move timer does when it reaches 5 seconds, it could turn red in the final 50 total moves between the two players, and even flash in the final 10. This 200 move number could be tweaked if need be after testing.

Totally nonsense. Games that are naturally born to take a long time occur when neither side has a distinct advantage, yet one side realizes the other player has set up defenses to counter his proposed attack, so he must regroup to another area and instill deception at the same time. In doing this reversal attack, or brainwashing attempt at making the opponent think a counter is occurring elsewhere can take many dozens of moves with or without taking a piece or more than a couple of scouts or lutenants. This reassembling cannot be penalized with some non-sensical built in move counter. The number of moves in and of itself does not dictate the length of a game. It is not the length of games you are trying to change, you are trying to allow draws to occur that are natural draws. It is only for that unique but rare time when one opponent is being immature. 200 consecutive moves without a piece being taken nor revealed, is certainly a good enough concept to add if for some reason no one likes to put in good old fashioned ISF timers, proven and accepted worldwide. Good day.

I see a lot of people balking at the idea of the 200 as potentially being too long and would only serve to drag out a game. To those people I say that the auto draw proposal is designed to stop the worst of offenders first--those persons who will play for hours in a pointless game and the other player just gives up to escape. It is not meant to address every possible situation imaginable. If you want it to somehow act differently when no miners are present, or to be a maximum of 20 minutes in its action, then you'll have to settle for less than you would like with this rule. But if you're tired of playing games that go on nightmarishly long due to the worst of opponents, then this could help you. 

 

The move timer could be accelerated after the first 45 minutes (in real time) of a game, then the 15 second timer could become 5 seconds, and the personal timer would wind down to zero if a player was attempting to milk the  200 move stall.

I would toss out for consideration that with an auto draw in place we might just see bad behavior players stop trying to "wait out" their opponents because everyone would know the auto draw is coming. 

The autodraw has to be setup so that people who take forever to put their best strategy in place get burned for taking too long. This happens a lot when one player has taken one other players general but still does not know the spy or marshall, As the weaker opponent spins for swaps to keep the advantage at one piece, the player with the general still, is being so extra careful to keep his advantage that he spends a lot of needless time probing for rank of pieces that he forgets to go get the flag. His timer is running down (move count) and he should and righltly so get burned for it in the form of a draw.

Back in the day it was often put that we should couple the auto draw with a chasing rule so that the two would work complimentarily to one another. It was a good thought. But we didn't get that. When we got the HmmNess chasing rule we did not pass the auto draw with it. Now we have a discussion going for getting double chasing stopped. This, too, could be combined with the auto draw, and it would be appropriate, although not essential, to once again try to do both rules simultaneously. The Prof has brought this up in this thread again.

 

The double chase rule is coming regardless of creating an autodraw. Mark my words.

Napoleon 1 er has mentioned a couple of times in different places that we should have an agreement as to whether both players want an auto draw. This really misses the point of the rule in question because the auto draw is for precisely the situation where people are NOT TALKING. If both players are civil then they shouldn't have a problem with this auto draw proposal, as it is one that ends the game after a fairly long time... and players are ALWAYS able to end their game sooner if they so agree.
Yes the autodraw is good for the losing player and bad for the winning player, but howyou define winning is different if you have all the power and no miners, perhaps you are the one who wants the draw, but the other player refused and rightly so. It is his responsibility to move the game forward and start working his swaps and miners to get going to the flag, then if he fails and he is now at a disadvantage the table turns and the other player now does not want the draw. So lets be prudent about autodraws. Sometimes they are coming no matter what but sometimes the tides can turn. In any case an autodraw does not have to be agreed upon by both side. HOWEVER I THINK YOU CAN ADD AN OPTION IF BOTH PLAYERS AGREE BEFORE THE GAME STARTS TO REMOVE AUTODRAW. Then neither player can whine to these busy monitors.
Finally, maribo has talked about getting a total time game clock going, because the time of 200 moves is so variable. Perhaps this kind of rule could be added later but it would be nice to see auto draw in action by itself, or maybe in tandem with the double chasing rule, for awhile first.

Yea whatever. I once got burned by the player who tried to keep the game going forever because he had a general and no miners and I had 2 majors left and he could not trap any of my other pieces because he had no sisters to help his general but he would not draw and sure I benefited later from the 20 points, but I really just wanted to go eat lunch.I could give a crap about these ratings, but I do like to win, They are kind of separate issues.

 

The arbritrainess of the move counter to me, could be resolved, to me is if that 200 move counter does not even kick in until 30 minutes of real time has passed, then it looks for a sequence of 100 moves per side when nothing happens, and the personal timer starts ticking faster after the first 30 minutes to 10 seconds per move not 15.. Can you imagine that time, a real arshole would have to take 1000 seconds (only 15 minutes Gary, of stalling during his 100 move stall)

 



#16 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,265 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 31 March 2014 - 06:47 AM

Maribo, first of all, I wish you would edit your post not to repeat my post two full times. That just clutters up the forum.

Second, I'd be willing to entertain your proposition as to an auto draw but I'm not sure exactly what you would want it to be. As I've said, the auto draw based on no. of moves is meant for a worst case scenario. The reason we would not want to keep the 200 moves is that it interfered with games too much, and unfairly. But the general purpose of it would be kill the worst of the worst bad situations. Perhaps this purpose is too narrow and infrequent but there it is. In any event we could tweak the no. of moves for the rule as I have said.

I am not sure of what a better rule might be, but in the case of your example with the opponent who had the gen and no sisters you would have been benefitted nicely by the auto draw proposed.

You say an interesting thing when you say that we shouldn't be after toning game lengths down but rather making sure natural draws get enforced. I can see the distinction, perhaps, but in the largest number of cases they will surely be the same thing. I think we would agree that the danger with the a.d. proposed is that we might wrongly limit a guy who is clearly making an attempt to win the game if our number is too low, but here again we can tweak the 200 number if necessary. Closing down all natural draws faster will obviously take some more sophisticated programming.

I understand you want to move to an ISF timer situation, but I'm not sure that system, which is for live playing, has an answer for the problem we are trying to address with a.d. for our online environment. We have no referees here, for example.

So to clarify, are you in agreement with auto draw based upon moves at all?

Gary
The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#17 Gaius Marius

Gaius Marius

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 599 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 31 March 2014 - 06:49 AM

I believe I would win tons more games if this was implemented. I got tired of wasting time since I have a life and taking 6 hours running to make sure u don't lose 10 imaginary points does not interest me.


"Everyone pities the weak, jealousy you have to earn."


#18 Luckypapa

Luckypapa

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Major

Posted 31 March 2014 - 07:20 AM

If a capture has been made Lucky, the counter would reset. I am talking if NO capture has been made in X number of moves would the game end.

I know what you mean Midnight, but I have played games where forward and backwards shuffling was made to an art......
Sometimes stratego becomes Chess and a tactical game and then 100 moves is to less in my opinion.

Lucky

The secret of happiness is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you should do.


#19 maribo

maribo

    Sergeant

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 470 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Marshal

Posted 31 March 2014 - 07:25 AM

Gary, the move counter as a measure has no basis, I will not agree to it. It makes no sense. But yes for those rare instances it surely will help those gamesmove to a draw that take forever. In my game I  was wanting to draw, the other player refused. The timer would of helped me, but not the move counter.

Why?

because i could kill every one of my pieces except for one, so the game was a draw hours before i finally quit and later got my points back. The move counter would not of helped because I kept trying trying to whittle his piece count down. So the 200 move thingy never happened. The timer did kicke in at 1 hour 35 minutes.

OMG cant you see the diff?



#20 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Captain

  • WC Online Team
  • 823 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 31 March 2014 - 11:16 AM

Admin (ref) intervention would be best solution. Else 200 excluding chase sounds fair


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

 

Follow the 3rd Online World Championship: http://forum.strateg...d-championship/





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users