Jump to content


Photo

Gravon vs Stratego


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

Poll: Gravon or Stratego? (34 member(s) have cast votes)

Gravon or Stratego?

  1. Gravon (11 votes [32.35%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 32.35%

  2. Stratego (18 votes [52.94%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 52.94%

  3. Same (3 votes [8.82%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.82%

  4. Other/Dont know (2 votes [5.88%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.88%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,873 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 16 May 2017 - 01:00 PM

One huge disadvantage with Gravon compared with stratego.com is that Gravon used to not be playable on a phone or tablet. Has this changed, does anyone know?

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

#22 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,416 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 May 2017 - 07:53 PM

I'd really like to know how anyone at Gravon knows the are no aliases there. How is an alias blocked from being there?

there are such a few people playing there that they do not have the motivation to make aliases. And admins there make IP and email check before accepting any new member. It is still very strange that despite all the nice things they have there like statistics, higher number of setups etc ... they are far less successful than stratego.com. What is worse there is design of the board (fact that there is no pic behind the pieces makes it more difficult to remember the pieces), 2 weeks waiting before getting approved (this is eliminating all players who just want to see what the game is for fun), no android version, not appearing on first page when you google "stratego" etc...


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

#23 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 16 May 2017 - 10:59 PM

@Gary about the Aliases,

 

My dad and I both tried to make a ranked account. They ended up banning both of us for trying to make 2 accounts, until I went in unreg and explained to the admin, but they still only allow 1 account to play ranked. He said we were banned because we both had the same IP, even though we both had valid emails. So the fact that it requires a valid email at the start, check of ip, and takes 2 weeks to approve makes it a lot more alias safe than here.



#24 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,493 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 16 May 2017 - 11:21 PM

My dad and I both tried to make a ranked account. They ended up banning both of us for trying to make 2 accounts, until I went in unreg and explained to the admin, but they still only allow 1 account to play ranked. He said we were banned because we both had the same IP, even though we both had valid emails. 

 

Wow, pretty much the complete opposite of this site!


  • Don_Homer and Fairway like this

#25 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,873 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:27 AM

Is there any problem with disconnecters at Gravon? Do they have a 2:30 countdown clock, for example.

What about buffer abuse? Do some players just allow the bigger Gravon buffer to countdown to zero after they've lost?

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

#26 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 17 May 2017 - 07:38 AM

I've never experienced either but I do think they have a disconnect buffer in case you get kicked. However if a player was found to be unsporting and wasting peoples' time I don't think the admins would miss or tolerate it.

 

The problem currently with gravon is the amount of stratego players has really dropped off recently. I am not sure why but nobody is online anymore when I go there around 21gmt which used to be my best shot at getting 2-3 games. All the malefiz and rummikub regulars are there, but no strategists.


Edited by Losermaker, 17 May 2017 - 07:41 AM.

  • Don_Homer likes this

#27 Hielco

Hielco

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:25 PM

http://www.gravon.net/

 

try it


  • Don_Homer likes this

#28 Hielco

Hielco

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:26 PM

http://java.com/en/index.jsp

 

 

need this download too


  • Don_Homer likes this

#29 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 21 July 2017 - 02:22 PM

Sohal already made a pretty accurate analyses about the difference but I will make a new one based on the current situation of all things gravon has and this site does not.

Gravon has imo the best website to play stratego. It has:
-A professional, adjustable isf clock which made every game completely fair in time to think
- a draw claim button for long balanced games in line with isf rules
- isf square rules are 100% implemented, even for scouts
- a very reliable ranking system with different systems and all time and yearly ranking
- classic, barrage, duel, ul
- watching is possible
-playing open and with adjusted pieces
- 40 setups you can save for different games
-new pieces, old pieces, American pieces
- admins
-random setup
-full database of all played games and player vs player feature
-no animation waiting
- squares are seperated and there are coordinates (like c7, g5)
and everything is free!

Its sad there are not many players there anymore!

Edited by Don_Homer, 21 July 2017 - 02:41 PM.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#30 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 31 July 2017 - 12:13 PM

Hi mr. Gary,

 

I believe gravon has all the rules perfectly implemented. Can you tell or show me what is wrong with this scout 2 square rule at gravon? I think you are mistaken here...

The programming is closer to the ISF at Gravon than here except for the ISF 10.2 (Two Squares Rule for scouts) which is programmed wrongly at Gravon while correct here at stratego.com.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#31 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,226 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 31 July 2017 - 01:43 PM

Gary is right... I was witness there in one of gravon's rooms... we were there showing Dieter Krapp and he had to admit it was wrong indeed.


Lo

#32 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,873 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 31 July 2017 - 02:31 PM

The statement that Gravon had the scout rule programmed wrongly comes from investigations in early 2015, using Gravon's wonderful free arrangement option to test. Whether Gravon has fixed the problem now, I cannot say. I am not there much, as I'm always and only playing on my phone and I can't figure out how to get Gravon to work on my phone.

Anyway, in a question raised by Kernel Mustard here:

http://forum.strateg...ion/#entry28406

he asked if he could have a scout do the following in consecutive turns:

0) Start at A1
1) move from A1 to A5
2) move from A5 to A3
3) move from A3 to A7
4) move from A7 to A2

A discussion followed on the rule currently at 10.2 in the ISF rules. I had to admit that The Prof was right and I wrong but in my defense the language of 10.2 is awfully confusing. (As a side note, he and I arrived at what we feel is much better language for the rule. I reprint the current language and our suggestion for both 10.1 and 10.2 at the bottom of this post.

The crux of the matter developed in that thread to be this: for move number 4 above, could it move from A7 to A5, or would it be only allowed to go from A7 to A6. It could not go all the way to A2, clearly (though KM rightly mentions the single player game has awful programming allowing this). What, exactly, would the scout be blocked on move number 4?

I personally held, wrongly as it turned out, that it would be only allowed to go to A6 but not A5 while The Prof insisted it could go to A5 (though not A4).

As I already said, in my defense this was and still is a very complicated area of the rules. The current Article 10 language is just too convoluted to be understood clearly. The ironic thing was that at Gravon, using free arrangement, Gravon blocked the scout from going to A5 and stopped its motion at A6, as I had thought correct. This gave me great hope of out-arguing The Prof at the time, but alas, Gravon and I were both wrong.

Shortly after this The Prof and I approached Dieter Krapp at the time (he's the head of both Gravon and the ISF) and showed him the problem so he was definitely aware of it back then. So they may have fixed it, as I stated earlier. I wouldn't know. But interestingly, when we tested the programming at here at stratego.com (with its reputation for not having correct programming on other things like double chasing) we found that the blocking was fine and perfectly in line with what 10.2 says. Here the scout could go from A7 to A5 as The Prof had contended. By the way, we also tested Meta. At Metaforge there was no programming for 10.2 at all at the time. None.

Current 10.2 (our suggested language below)

10. Three Moves on Two Squares: Two-Squares Rule
10.1
It is not allowed to move a piece more than 3 times non-stop between the same two squares, regardless of what the opponent is doing. It does not matter whether a piece is moving and thereby attacking an opponent's piece, or just moving to an empty square.
10.2
When a scout is involved in the Two-Squares Rule, a scout is considered to start on the starting position of his move plus all the squares he steps over, and he ends on the final position of his move plus all the squares he steps over.

Three Moves on Two Squares: Two-Squares Rule
10.1
A player may not move a piece between the same two squares on more than three consecutive turns, regardless of whether these turns involve an attack or simply moving to an empty square.

10.2
A player may not move a scout such that it crosses the line dividing the same two squares on more than three consecutive turns.


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

#33 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 31 July 2017 - 05:12 PM

Thanks for your explanation, Gary. Its a very specific part of the 2 move scout rule. I think its very rare to actually happen in a game. That likely is the reason I never consciously experienced it in my 2500+ games thereand didnt know there was a little bug. The prof was of course right about moving back to a5. I will check this week if this is fixed already there.

Furthermore the rule description, especially the 2nd part is not very clear indeed. I can imagine that your suggestion is still confusing. Altough short rules are preferable this one needs further explanation I believe.

However its very hard to understand bij reading anyway and better to understand with pictures or a demonstration for players who are not familiar with this rule.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#34 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,493 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 31 July 2017 - 06:09 PM

There was another programming error that we found as well.  Suppose piece A is chasing piece B (for example, we had one player chase another all the way around a lake until it reached a repeated board position and was blocked).  Then a move is made elsewhere that breaks the chase sequence.  Next, piece A resumes chasing piece piece B.  Gravon will block it on the 2nd chasing move!  This is really weird.  Gravon's programming remembers and blocks board positions that occurred before the current chase, but then doesn't block the first move, even though that already would be a repeated board position, but rather the second move.  They say on their website ""ALL situations previously on the board do count, including situations long before the first threatening"  But according to my understanding of ISF rules, this is not correct.  When a player makes a non-chasing move, shouldn't the previous chase be forgotten?  How do others understand this?



#35 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 31 July 2017 - 06:42 PM

Hello prof. Interesting situation again. It looks like a minor programming error again. The situation you describe would in a offline tournament be seen as highly unsportive and the referee would not tolerate it.

Therefore I think its a good thing gravon remembers it despite the "in between move". Unfortunately it doesnt rembeber with in between moves in tripple chase on 2 or 3 squares but that would be a new situation :).

I thought the official rule regarding your described situation is that it isnt allowed to get an exact similar board situation after a (long) chase. This because no progress is been made which made the chasing useless except for winning time. Winning time by chasing is considered as unsportive and if I remember correctly this is also included in ISF rules.

Edited by Don_Homer, 31 July 2017 - 06:45 PM.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#36 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,873 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 31 July 2017 - 08:22 PM

Furthermore the rule description, especially the 2nd part is not very clear indeed. I can imagine that your suggestion is still confusing. Altough short rules are preferable this one needs further explanation I believe.
However its very hard to understand bij reading anyway and better to understand with pictures or a demonstration for players who are not familiar with this rule.


Yes, confusing is the name of the game with these scout movements. I appreciate that the language we came up with is not at first clear. It's an out-of-the-box approach to the rule. But with the part 2 that I reprinted above, you not only have a shorter rule but one that will be far easier to explain, I submit to you, even if at first it appears unclear.

Crossing the same line between two squares is the essence of what this movement rule tries to block. With a non-scout piece you can't move between the same two squares a fourth time, right? What you really cannot do is cross the line dividing those two squares more than three times. Think about it.

If I were to say this right now it would be too much but the whole of Article 10 could be technically replaced by just the following and it would apply to all pieces, scouts included. For that reason I would call it elegantly beautiful. But it would be shockingly short. All it would take to cover the 3 moves on 2 squares issue is this language:

A player may not move any piece such that it crosses the line dividing the same two squares on more than three consecutive turns.

Nothing else is needed when you get right down to it. The part about attacking or moving to an empty square is helpful, perhaps, but not essential to the workings of the rule. The main thing is crossing the same line between two squares only three times. That's the limit.

Hope it's not too unclear. :)
  • Don_Homer and The Prof like this

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

#37 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,873 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 31 July 2017 - 08:31 PM

The Prof, I'd forgotten that issue. :)

There was yet another chasing situation if you'll recall that we showed to Dieter Krapp. He was not as bothered by it as Nortrom, whom I think agreed with us about the situation needing to be fixed when we showed him. There was the double chase situation at Gravon involving a distance chasing leg that wasn't being blocked. As Gravon only blocks a double chase where the attacking pieces move adjacent to their objects, it didn't block a double chase where one of the pieces was separated from that object by at least one square. This kind of double chase was non-ending, even at Gravon.

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

#38 cflag

cflag

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 729 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 31 July 2017 - 08:59 PM

Sohal already made a pretty accurate analyses about the difference but I will make a new one based on the current situation of all things gravon has and this site does not.

Gravon has imo the best website to play stratego. It has:
-A professional, adjustable isf clock which made every game completely fair in time to think
- a draw claim button for long balanced games in line with isf rules
- isf square rules are 100% implemented, even for scouts
- a very reliable ranking system with different systems and all time and yearly ranking
- classic, barrage, duel, ul
- watching is possible
-playing open and with adjusted pieces
- 40 setups you can save for different games
-new pieces, old pieces, American pieces
- admins
-random setup
-full database of all played games and player vs player feature
-no animation waiting
- squares are seperated and there are coordinates (like c7, g5)
and everything is free!

Its sad there are not many players there anymore!

I agree with you, but 'java' program creates to many problems(personnaly I cant log on the last months) and also no tournaments were organized after 2013.

P.s In my opinion there could be a fantastic 'online world championship' over there.

Best regards


  • Don_Homer likes this

#39 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 01 August 2017 - 12:32 PM

Hi cflag, Have you tried the advice given at the forum there about Java?

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#40 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 522 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 01 August 2017 - 12:36 PM

Gary, I like the explanation today! You are right. However I would keep the "regardless" part.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users