Jump to content


Photo

The official Stratego low content thread


  • Please log in to reply
111 replies to this topic

#21 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 02 October 2017 - 07:04 PM

I never said it was better, but if I grow with it...I may be able squash you like a bug under my foot ;)



#22 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 02 October 2017 - 07:14 PM

Now introducing 'Epic Stratego'. The structure of the lakes can be designed many ways. With 64 pieces (over 50% more pieces than a traditional board) there was a need to add a couple ranks.
 
The ranks are as follows:
1 spy (takes out Supreme Commander)
1 Supreme Commander
1Commander
1 Marshal
2 Generals
3 Colonels
5 Majors
6 Captains
6 Lieutenants  
6 Sergeants
8 miners
12 scouts
9 bombs
1 flag
 
https://imgur.com/gallery/C4MVM
 
 
You can turn the board vertical and make a some interesting changes. 
https://imgur.com/gallery/zmNMq
 
All ideas can be used to make this 'Epic Stratego' better.


Very fun idea! I recognice the Waterloo game and the old pieces :). Do the commander(s) have special powers?

#23 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 02 October 2017 - 07:23 PM

I guess you could make special powers but no, the idea is just taking traditional Stratego and just adding 50% of the ranks to fill the waterloo board. My thought is that it would help with memory and knowing a regular board better. Like stretching a muscle. 


  • Don_Homer likes this

#24 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 02 October 2017 - 07:30 PM

I don't like the 2x3 lakes. I would suggest 4 paths of 2x2, 3 lakes of 2x2 and 2 lakes on outside of 1 width:

 

X--XX--XX--XX--X


Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#25 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 02 October 2017 - 07:42 PM

Also I think I would improve on the Spy concept and have for example two of them that can take out the top 3 ranks. Or one spy for each.


  • Don_Homer likes this

Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#26 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 02 October 2017 - 08:02 PM

I would take away 1 commander and 1 miner and add a spy or superspy and maybe another flag. Another idea is a "less powerfull flag" what gives you half a win or something :)

#27 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 02 October 2017 - 09:18 PM

I would take away 1 commander and 1 miner and add a spy or superspy and maybe another flag. Another idea is a "less powerfull flag" what gives you half a win or something :)

 

Another flag seems flawed. You would put them together with 4 bombs. and it is much easier to defend than two separate flags.


Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#28 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 02 October 2017 - 09:48 PM

But you lose both at once. While it could only be your "low ranked flag".

#29 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,136 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 02 October 2017 - 09:55 PM

another interesting version is the 40 pieces version but you are free to select your 40 pieces, the only obligation is you need 1 flag. What are the other 39 pieces you would select and how would you make your setup and attack? Is 1 flag and 39 marshall really the best choice?


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


#30 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 03 October 2017 - 12:10 AM

Not 39 marshals but maybe 35 marshals, 3 miners and a scout just in case. I don't like that much choice in choosing the pieces. I would rather be told what pieces I get every game and know me and my opponent have the same pieces to play the best we are capable.

I don't like the idea of a spy taking out top three pieces because that gives the supreme commander an edge being that only the spy takes him (one piece) and all other pieces have two pieces of more to beat it. It over powers the SC. I like the natural order of having the top two pieces only conquerable by one piece just like traditional Stratego. However, I don't like the gap between the colonels (3) and majors (5). The majors gain a bit extra power this way. I think maybe going 4 majors and 5 captains is the solution... yes, I will change it in my original post, that's what makes since.

Ouwesok, I don't like having multiple spy's because it really defeats the way the pyramid works with the pieces. If you lay out the pieces like a Christmas tree with the marshal at the top and the scouts at the bottom, you will see there is a natural hierchy as you would see in most organizations or roles of power. Allowing for these random spy's makes disorder for predictabiliy. They would remind me of the infiltrator/cannon/spotter in the new variations, the problem with this is it brings an un realistic power to order of rank. This acts as a super marshal in a defensive way which prevents any normal strong attacking tactic which is by and large the biggest thing that separates the best from the rest. These type of super pieces are a disadvantage for the stronger player. Yes, the stronger player also has the same pieces but stronger player does not need these super pieces to win where as the weaker player will benefit with it significantly more for that reason. It evens the playing field. To me, that is not justified for the hard practicing or naturally gifted players.
  • GaryLShelton likes this

#31 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 03 October 2017 - 12:42 AM

I would rather do no flag than two flags but two flags may be better than one 😉
With two, I think you should have to capture both to win. In a game where a time clock is used, once the time hit zero, a player with one flag would win if his opponent did not also take a flag.
  • Don_Homer likes this

#32 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 October 2017 - 07:58 AM

another interesting version is the 40 pieces version but you are free to select your 40 pieces, the only obligation is you need 1 flag. What are the other 39 pieces you would select and how would you make your setup and attack? Is 1 flag and 39 marshall really the best choice?

 

This idea is obviously flawed, since it would make sergeants-colonels obsolete, since these are strictly inferior to generals.

 

If you want to introduce a deck building element into Stratego, you need to assign points to each piece and give players an upper limit. If you want a second marshal, well, you will need to add more sergeants or you go over the top. The fun thing of this idea is that you can give good players a handicap. Also it introduces a leveling element (do I need spies or is my opponent going to play without marshals?)

 

Now that we have arrived at deck building, an obvious sidestep is drafting. You can give each player a flag and put the 78 pieces into a closed bag. Give each player an X amount of money, for example 100 coins. Now, in turns, a player reveals a piece and names any amount of coins. The opponent now chooses to take the piece and pay those coins to opponent or to reject the piece and receive those coins from opponent. When a player has 40 pieces, the rest is for opponent. You must be careful not to pay too much for a good piece or you will not have the cash for future good pieces. Additionally, you could award a bonus piece to the player that ends the bidding game with most coins.


Edited by OuweSok, 03 October 2017 - 08:00 AM.

Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#33 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,136 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 03 October 2017 - 11:55 AM

I saw proposal of 1 flag 3 miners 1 scout and 35 marshalls but no bomb?
Looks like 1 flag and 39 marshalls is in any case weaker than 1 flag 38 marshalls and 1 scout cause the scout will reach opponent's flag much faster than the last marsh. Still advantage with 2 scouts 37 marshalls. Advantage still with 1 scout 3 bombs sealing the flag and 35 marshalls. Question is what would be the most efficient army against 1 flag and 39 marshalls? 2nd question is what would be the most efficient army against this army that is most efficient against 1 flag and 39 marshalls? ... at the end what is the overall most efficient army and where should the flag be located. In a corner is to dangerous cause if opponent makes full attack on that side your corner will be empty before you will have time to bring your marshalls there ... most likely best place for the flag is 4th or 7th column back row ... is it right?
  • Don_Homer likes this

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


#34 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 October 2017 - 12:40 PM

Put some spies in your all-marshal army and you will have the advantage vs an all-marshal army. But it will end up in a draw anyway, because the all-marshal army simply remains passive to not allow for a 2-for-1


Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#35 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,653 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 03 October 2017 - 01:27 PM

A related topic begun ages ago now, in early 2015, is this:

http://forum.strateg...6-epic-battles/


OuweSok, you and Mitthunder are kindred spirits, it would seem.

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

#36 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 03 October 2017 - 02:54 PM

Napster, there is no perfect place for the flag. The important thing is that it is where it needs to be.

#37 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,136 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 October 2017 - 10:36 PM

Napster, there is no perfect place for the flag. The important thing is that it is where it needs to be.

..not for that version. Imagine that both players have 39 marshs. To win it all depends where the flag is because when both players are left with one marsh only then only the one who is closest to the flag will win. So if you are clever you shall arrange to have your flag on back row behind lake   because it is the positions where a last marsh will have to make one more move to reach the flag than if the flag is in back row in direct line from the lanes. Also all the game tactic will be to make sure your own last marsh to be as close as possible from the middle lane and from opponent's field while his last marsh is left further in his field. So if your marsh is in back row on left then attack all from right  in a anticlockwise direction and make sure your last row marshs get moved as early as possible. Let him attack and empty your field on the flag side, just move your center positioned marshs on that same side in case he is approaching the flag to fast. The tactics is to minimize your number of moves which means let the opponent make most of the attacks. Concentrate only on moving your marshs as far as possible in his field. A turn when you move forward is an advantage than a turn when you exchange a marsh.


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


#38 OuweSok

OuweSok

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:24 PM

Two rules questions.

 

If the last two pieces exchange, is it a draw or whoever has the next turn wins?

 

In a game of  today I moved a scout from E1 to E8 to scout a piece at D8, that could only move to D7. So he moved to D7, I to E7, he to D8, I do E8, he to D7 and then I could not move again. Is that correct? I was kind of surprised by this.


Check out my Stratego Youtube channel ! :o


#39 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:51 PM

If anything, would not the player with the next turn after the final exchange be the looser? He is indeed the first player to have a turn without any movable pieces, is he not? As it stands, Stratego.com allows for the final exchange to conclude the match with a draw but I don't know if this has been discussed with the ISF.

#40 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Miner

  • NASF Committee
  • 194 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 08 October 2017 - 07:06 PM

I just looked in a rules book and it reads: " if all your movable pieces have been captured AND you cannot move or attack on YOUR turn, you must surrender and declare your opponent the winner."
According to this, if I can force my opponent to put his last piece beside my last piece and I can move and attack on my last turn, trading our final pieces. My opponent is the only player left not being able to move or attack on his turn, not me.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users