Jump to content


Photo

Double/Multiple Chasing Rule Poll


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

Poll: Double/Multiple (D/M) Chasing Rule Questions (19 member(s) have cast votes)

What level of punishment would you like to see for a player who commits a recognized double/multiple (d/m) chase in a game?

  1. 1) A uniform 25 point deduction (one-week ban QA) for every double/multiple chase game. (1 votes [5.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  2. 2) A uniform 50 point deduction (one-week ban QA) for every double/multiple chase game. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 3) A uniform 50 point deduction plus a one-week ban (two-week ban QA) for every double/multiple chase game. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 4) A penalty schedule: 25 points (one-week ban QA), 50 points (two-week ban QA), 100 points (one-month ban QA), ELO to 100 (three month ban.QA), permanent ban (9 votes [47.37%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 47.37%

  5. 5) A penalty schedule: one-week ban, two-week ban, one-month ban, three-month ban, permanent ban (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  6. 6) Both 4) and 5). A points deduction plus a ban. (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  7. 7) Some other points deduction/banning penalty (please comment below in the topic) (3 votes [15.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.79%

  8. 8) Nothing. Do not punish double/multiple chasing at all. (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

Should a Warning Only step be added to every penalty plan above for FIRST-TIME d/m chasing offenders?

  1. 1) Yes (6 votes [31.58%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 31.58%

  2. 2) Yes, unless the MT judges their double/multiple chasing prevented their loss (5 votes [26.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 26.32%

  3. 3) Yes, unless 2) above applies, or the offender double/multiple chases for more than 7 straight minutes OR makes a TOTAL of 40 d/m chasing moves in the game, of at least ten moves each time (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  4. 4) Yes, but for some other parameters (please comment below in the topic) (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  5. 5) No, no extra first-time warning is needed (4 votes [21.05%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.05%

Should the MT adjust ELO to penalize the double/multiple chaser with loss points and award the victim with victory points?

  1. 1) Yes, for all games where a recognized claim of double/multiple chasing occurs, and the victim quits the game. (7 votes [36.84%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 36.84%

  2. 2) Yes, but only if the MT can clearly judge their double/multiple chasing prevented their loss, and the victim quits the game. (5 votes [26.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 26.32%

  3. 3) Yes, but only for 2) above, or if the offender double/multiple chases for at least 7 straight minutes OR makes a TOTAL of 40 d/m chasing moves in the game, of at least ten moves each time, and the victim quits the game. (3 votes [15.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.79%

  4. 4) Yes, but for some other criteria not listed here (please describe in topic below) (1 votes [5.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  5. 5) No, the MT should never award a win for this (3 votes [15.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.79%

Vote

#61 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Miner

Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:34 AM

Keep in mind that only attacking / threatening moves that are repeatedly and without any chance of capture using the MS rule are considered illegal. All other forms of repetition are taken care of I think (3 move rule comes to mind).

 

I was thinking of non-attacking opening shuffles, like A4-A5 J6-J7 A5-A4 J7-J6 and now I4-I5 B7-B6 I5-I4 B6-B7 ad infinitum. This doesn't fall under MS rule or 3 move rule, right? It would be nice if an opponent who does not want to make any progress can only do so at the cost of a draw offer. 

 

In chess 'forced draws' are much more common than Stratego. Also, in real tournaments, this, luckily, is way less of an issue with time control that will end in a draw if neither player wishes to advance the game.

 

Yes, because of lack of move notation, "running out the clock" is the most elegant solution in live games. I could live with this also applying to games here.

 

---

 

As for internet autodraws and such, in Stratego, there are many seemingly pointless moves, e.g. getting the Marshal from A2 to J9 is going to take nearly 20 moves. Take into account an annoying spy that has to be pushed away, this can get up to 30 or even more. Many of those moves will be without captures. In chess you have mobile pieces (knight, bishop, rook) and the hypermobile queen. A smaller board too and more difficult to prevent forks compared to Stratego.

 

Should there ever be an autodraw on here, it definitely should be a high amount of moves (maybe 150? 200? 250?). It would give players sufficient time to try something and also take care of the annoying situations like a general that can't be captured vs a marshal , 2 colonels and 3 majors.

 

Another thing to take into consideration, is that given the current implementation of the anti-chasing (not online), you can attack a piece 3x, then another piece 3x, then retreat either piece one field, wasting up to 6 (12) moves. This can go on for quite some time and easily stall up to a lot of moves. ( one of the things I feel could and should be improved for live play ).

 

Yes, it's hard to find a good threshold number of moves for this. My guess is that if endgame databases are ever computed for Stratego, the maximum win lengths will dwarf those in chess (a thousand moves in some cases perhaps). Running out the clock is a practical compromise.



#62 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:42 AM

It does fall under the three move rule, regardless whether it's an attack or not. MS rule only applies in case of attacks, though

 

You can even lose a game after you move 3x between say A1-A2 and your second-last piece gets traded off. In case you can't make the move A1 -> A2 (assume B1 is a bomb), you'll lose as a result of the 3-move rule ;).


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#63 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Miner

Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:59 AM

It does fall under the three move rule, regardless whether it's an attack or not. MS rule only applies in case of attacks, though

 

You can even lose a game after you move 3x between say A1-A2 and your second-last piece gets traded off. In case you can't make the move A1 -> A2 (assume B1 is a bomb), you'll lose as a result of the 3-move rule ;).

 

But the sequence I showed (2 moves each in A-J columns, then 2 moves in I-B columns) has nowhere a 3 move sequence of the same piece over 2 squares, but there is no progress. 


Edited by TemplateRex, 04 May 2018 - 09:59 AM.


#64 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 May 2018 - 10:01 AM

 
 A4-A5 J6-J7 A5-A4 J7-J6 this sounds pretty repetitive. 

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#65 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Miner

Posted 04 May 2018 - 10:09 AM

 

 
 A4-A5 J6-J7 A5-A4 J7-J6 this sounds pretty repetitive. 

 

 

Of course, but it's not subject to the 3-move rule (only 2 consec moves between same 2 squares) and neither to MS rules (no attacks). So if this happens in the opening, and then the same happens in the I-B columns, do you have to run out the clock? Or can you call the arbiter and ask for a draw?



#66 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 May 2018 - 10:19 AM

Yes, I assumed you didn't feel like typing out the pointless longer sequence :).

 

If I were refereeing a case like that, I'd ask if both players could agree to a draw, if not, they'll have to enjoy until the end of the time i guess.


  • TemplateRex likes this
"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#67 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,885 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 06 May 2018 - 02:24 PM

The simple autodraw with 100 plus moves is an inferior method of ending the game than our current draw refusal rule of 10 minutes.

Here's why I say that: the 100 moves for each player could take, I suppose, as little as 3 seconds apiece to complete. For both players that now uses 6 seconds, and therefore each player can only make ten moves in a minute at best. In ten minutes they've now made 100 moves each and that is the same as our current ten minute limit.

But that is the best case.

What if either player uses more than 3 seconds a move? Of course, now the 100 moves will take longer than our current 10 minutes rule.

If you have a person delaying the game with 15 second moves continually (like nikosritz famously did for 30 minutes against Nortrom) you will reasonably only be able to get in 3 moves a minute per player and now 100 moves takes 33 1/3 minutes.

Naturally, if you ask for a larger number of moves for an autodraw, such as 150, 200, etc., this potential game delay factor only increases tremendously.

For an autodraw to work this game delay concern has to be addressed in a topic devoted to it. Some smart people have commented on it in the past but I do not believe there has ever been a winning consensus plan for an autodraw.

I've personally always been against a clock ending the game because it seems like it introduces a strategy that is undesirable, to me, for the players. But I cannot help but admit it would be far simpler to do than an autodraw.
  • Napoleon 1er likes 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

#68 roeczak

roeczak

    Captain

  • Tournament Manager
  • 798 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 06 May 2018 - 02:31 PM

Sorry that I didnt read the previous posts yet but I want to respond to Gary.

Gary , even if it takes double the time the autodraw is obviously far superior to the current rule.

Per the current rule , a player is forced to take at least three screenshots , submit a case , the MT has to open it and deliver the verdict to admin who has to change the points. An autodraw will remove the burden on the player , the MT and the admins simultaneously . Also, players will stop doing that because they see that it would eventually lead to a draw instead of a win for them (even if some of them eventually get caught)

Again, for each one the submits a correct case , there is another one who submits an incomplete one , and many more who have no idea what to do and will simply quit playing in such a full of abusers game. We seem to forget the people who aren't on the forum, but the admins certainly don't; they are the majority of their customers field so a rule that helps ALL users should be preffered over any case-based treatment.
  • tobermoryx and TemplateRex like this
If you enjoy stratego you might want to subscribe to Roeczak. Member of Stratego Captains Club. Actively trying to promote the game and would like to help in any activity towards that goal. Highest Rating : 898 (Platinum Marshal)

#69 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 May 2018 - 02:52 PM

Autodraw without reasonable clock settings is not a good option for this game.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#70 roeczak

roeczak

    Captain

  • Tournament Manager
  • 798 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 06 May 2018 - 03:38 PM

Can you elaborate how a 100 move no capture auto draw would hurt the game? (Provided double chasing is not allowed of course)
  • Thucydides_Olorou likes this
If you enjoy stratego you might want to subscribe to Roeczak. Member of Stratego Captains Club. Actively trying to promote the game and would like to help in any activity towards that goal. Highest Rating : 898 (Platinum Marshal)

#71 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,447 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 May 2018 - 04:37 PM

i guess a good compromize would be autodraw after 10 minutes ...


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

#72 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Colonel

  • Moderators
  • 1,671 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 May 2018 - 05:00 PM

Can you elaborate how a 100 move no capture auto draw would hurt the game? (Provided double chasing is not allowed of course)

In that case, I can't.

 

Keep in mind that you can waste a lot of moves by attacking a piece 3x, then doing something else then doing the exact same thing again though.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

#73 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 06 May 2018 - 05:17 PM

The simple autodraw with 100 plus moves is an inferior method of ending the game than our current draw refusal rule of 10 minutes.

 

Gary , even if it takes double the time the autodraw is obviously far superior to the current rule.

 

Why not have both?  Autodraw will take care of games that are moving at a natural speed and the player requesting the draw doesn't want to be having to collect evidence to present a case, or doesn't know about the forum.  But draw refusal cases could still be brought by players whose opponents are refusing draws and taking a long time to move.  



#74 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,885 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 06 May 2018 - 07:35 PM

roeczak, I agree with you in part. You are right that the forum cases don't apply to those that don't know about the forum. I would only say there that the forum is here for all, whether many don't know about us and some never will. For the few that do know about us or traipse across our way daily we do attempt to help in the after-the-fact justice department, and this is a good thing, I think.

The ten minute rule for draws is purely a creation of this website meant to help give justice and it has proven itself over a few years now, I think it's safe to say. Indeed, it has become well known. That we require screenshot evidence in the way we do is tedious, admittedly, and somewhat onerous to have to do for our members. But I submit to you there is no other way that we can adjudicate cases without it. A system where moderators could go back and review any game from start to finish would remove this requirement, perhaps, but we don't have such a thing now.

As for an autodraw itself, it's not a bad thing but if you say

Gary , even if it takes double the time the autodraw is obviously far superior to the current rule.

.

I think many in the know about our rules will still prefer to save the time with our ten minute procedure. For those who know nothing about our rules they will possibly be helped by an autodraw, you're right. So I don't disagree an autodraw could have a place here, only that in its basic version, it's just not sophisticated enough to completely replace our current system.

I would like to think that people on this site could arrive at the ideal autodraw that is sensitive enough to supplant MT draw refusals for all, where the 10 minute rule is only a faint memory. Failing that, The Prof's suggestion of both rules wouldn't be a bad idea.

IF WE CAN EVER GET PROGRAMMERS!

:)

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

#75 Oracle

Oracle

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Lieutenant

Posted 06 May 2018 - 10:37 PM

An idea regarding draw refusal.

 

If it is possible to change the program, i would recommend to handle the draw cases in the following way:

Player A want draw, but B do not agree with it. In this case B has to show a progress in 5 minutes (his time counts only), otherwise it is draw automatically.

It has to be determined the mean of progress, but i think if a player is in a hurry to show something, 5 own minutes it is should be enough for it. In this manner most draw refusal cases should end quite shortly and automatically.

 

Possible problems:

1) It is necessary the addition of an extra timer.

2) It has to be determined automatically the mean of progress.


  • mazuzam likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users