Jump to content


Photo

Enforcement of ISF Stratego game rules


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

Poll: Should MT, finally, enforce ISF rules regarding chasing? (25 member(s) have cast votes)

Should MT, finally, enforce ISF rules regarding chasing?

  1. Yes (24 votes [96.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 96.00%

  2. No (1 votes [4.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 21 October 2017 - 01:37 PM

I think total buffer is 15 minutes and time per move 4 seconds but better get it confirmed by those who play isf tournaments.

Isf allows to choose different times by organiser. Options are
40.00min playing time 10.04 buffer (only for juniors)
50.00-65min playing time in different combinations with 10.05-18.03 buffer time
and 5 min setup time (maybe free to choose). And 3-5seconds free move time (after those seconds clock will count down every move)

If the buffer time ends with 3,4 or 5 sec, that should also be the move time.

mostly we play 55/12.04 or 65/15.04 with 5 min setup time.

you can find this under isf tournament regulations (chapter 16) under http://www.strategob...isf-spelregels/

Edited by Don_Homer, 21 October 2017 - 01:56 PM.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#22 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 21 October 2017 - 02:19 PM

The cons I read about enforcement of isf rules to stratego.com are small things like clocks, chasing, knowledge of complicated rules. I think chasing and clocks are worth seperated topics. I believe ISF rules should also be applied for this but its not a must. We can stick to some details like the 10min draw refusal and the absence of a game time if this gives too much controversy or will not be implemented. Other things who 95% agrees on could be chanced into (adjusted)isf rules. It would make it more fair here!

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#23 Morx

Morx

    Captain

  • WC Online Team
  • 769 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 23 October 2017 - 03:58 PM

I think that double chasing is a thing that truly annoys the more senior live players.

 

It does annoy me when my marshall is about to get a colonel in the 3 moves rule and the opponent starts to counter chase a piece that they would not be able to get just to prevent me from taking a piece that would be lost. It does not happen a lot in games, but when it does its very frustrating. Also I feel like that its most times the same players that intentionally use this tactic in all their games.

 

On clock times: enforcing a clock with 4 seconds is difficult on a site that sometimes has 4-10 sec lag while moves are being made.

In the past we asked for adjustable clock setups or a few different clock programs to pick from. This would help for organizing tournaments for sure.

 

If these are the main benefits of joining the YES camp, then I will join the cause.

Also helps that Nortrom says they are the cool guys ;)

 

Morx



#24 Lonello

Lonello

    General

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

Posted 23 October 2017 - 04:54 PM

I actually said to him this morning that was his weakest argument given :lol: :D!! But you're quite right this seems to be elderly stuff. The youngsters probably care less... they were still in diapers when this topic got heat. That makes you, me and Nortrom people with senior moments allright :rolleyes: B).


Lo

#25 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Marshal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 23 October 2017 - 07:18 PM

I think that double chasing is a thing that truly annoys the more senior live players.
 
It does annoy me when my marshall is about to get a colonel in the 3 moves rule and the opponent starts to counter chase a piece that they would not be able to get just to prevent me from taking a piece that would be lost. It does not happen a lot in games, but when it does its very frustrating. Also I feel like that its most times the same players that intentionally use this tactic in all their games.
 
On clock times: enforcing a clock with 4 seconds is difficult on a site that sometimes has 4-10 sec lag while moves are being made.
In the past we asked for adjustable clock setups or a few different clock programs to pick from. This would help for organizing tournaments for sure.
 
If these are the main benefits of joining the YES camp, then I will join the cause.
Also helps that Nortrom says they are the cool guys ;)
 
Morx


As far as i understand isf rules it says that double chasing is not allowed but it says nothing about counterchasing. In your above example do you refer to counterchasing or to double chasing? With marsh threatening a colonel while in parallel the other threatens your last miner with his lieut this looks rather like counterchasing not double chasing.
In all discussions on that topic that can be found on this forum it has always been generally accepted that counterchasing is allowed. What do isf rules say exactly about counterchasing if any?
  • Don_Homer likes this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#26 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,270 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 23 October 2017 - 07:24 PM

As I understand it, Morx means that he has trapped one of the opponent s colonels with his marshal and it cannot escape according to the rule of two, so the opponent starts doublechasing him. As a result, Morx has to continuously move the chased pieces and until the opponent stops doublechasing him he cannot proceed to capturing the colonel.

Edited by Major Nelson, 23 October 2017 - 07:25 PM.

"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth."

 

-Plato

 

"Showing off is the fool's idea of glory."

 

-Bruce Lee


#27 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Marshal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 24 October 2017 - 07:09 AM

As of time of this post there are 18 votes yes and 1 no. I have still not voted because the question asked is not totally clear to me. What are "isf chasing rules"?
Is it:
1. Double or multiple chasing only
2. Counterchasing only
3. Chasing from distance only
4. All of the above 3 chasing cases
5. 2 of the above chasing cases only

What if a double chasing situation can be broken by the double chased player? For example player A has 2 miners left and player B has only 2 higher ranked pieces left which are each in diagonal of each miner one on left lane one on right lane. Player A can escape the double chase by moving backwards and then behind the lake. Of course player B will move on the other side of the lake so the double chasing is becoming a chasing from distance. Is this case where player A has possibility to break the double chase still considered a double chase case?
  • Don_Homer likes this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#28 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Colonel

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,700 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 24 October 2017 - 04:50 PM

As I understand it, Morx means that he has trapped one of the opponent s colonels with his marshal and it cannot escape according to the rule of two, so the opponent starts doublechasing him. As a result, Morx has to continuously move the chased pieces and until the opponent stops doublechasing him he cannot proceed to capturing the colonel.

 

In the example given it seems the opponent is only threatening one piece , so not double chasing .


  • Don_Homer and Major Nelson like this

#29 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Marshal

  • WC Online Team
  • 3,965 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 26 October 2017 - 02:18 PM

@Napoleon: ISF rules forbid both double, tripple, quadruple and higher forms of chasing. 
 
"Counterchasing" is currently allowed.

sOoQsuN.png


#30 roeczak

roeczak

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,250 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 26 October 2017 - 02:48 PM

@ Major Nelson: I don't think you interpreted this correctly.

The opponent of Morx starts to chase a piece that he cannot capture (but he can chase without it being able to escape from the chase) and when he is forced by the 2 sq rule to abandon the chase he moves to the side with his col, eventually forcing either the marsh to abandon the col or the other piece to be captured. This is called counter-chasing.

As I understand ISF rules this is currently allowed (right Nortrom?) ,but it shouldn't be IMHO (I think of it as a form of double chase)

Roeczak <----- Stratego YT channel
Highest Rating : 966 (Platinum Marshal)
Greek Champion 2019 


#31 Major Nelson

Major Nelson

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,270 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 26 October 2017 - 02:59 PM

Indeed I did not understand at the beginning the example Morx said, but now I get what he means. I ve experienced counterchasing in several games, personally I am not so sure that it belongs to the same category as chasing and doublechasing and that it ought to be forbidden.
  • Don_Homer likes this

"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth."

 

-Plato

 

"Showing off is the fool's idea of glory."

 

-Bruce Lee


#32 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Marshal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 26 October 2017 - 10:31 PM

19 people have voted to implement ISF rules here but I think not everybody really understands what this is about. Nortrom has now clarified everything. The question is only and strictly only about double/multiple chasing which are the only moves forbidden by ISF rules. The question is not about counterchasing or chasing from distance ... these 2 form of chasing are allowed by ISF rules and are also allowed here on stratego.com. So for these 2 forms of chasing we are already covered. Only double/multiple chasing is the issue. Just want to precise this cause I'm not sure all people who voted yes understood this is only about double/multiple chasing.

 

Now there are 2 cases of double/multiple chasing:

1) Case where the double/multiple chased player cannot break the chasing, typically when the last 2 miners are blocked in diagonal of 2 higher ranked pieces in a zone of the board where they cannot escape (for example against an edge of the board)

2) Case where the double/multiple chased player can break the chasing if he wants to (for example when the 2 chased pieces are in the lanes right and left of the lakes, the chased player can break the chase by moving backwards)

Are both cases to be considered or only those where the chasing player does not stop it and a non evolving game is generated?


  • texaspete09 and Major Nelson like this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#33 roeczak

roeczak

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,250 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 26 October 2017 - 11:46 PM

@ Napoleon 1er,Major Nelson : I simply told Nortrom that maybe the ISF should consider banning counterchasing , I don't see why that should be legal , please elaborate.

As for double/multiple chasing , I dont think there is a serious player who does not want to see it gone from the site. I would not consider the 2 cases to be different as in both the double chase prevents the chased from making progress , which is illegal. Forcing the chased to move away from the chase is basically what the chaser wants, isn't it?

Roeczak <----- Stratego YT channel
Highest Rating : 966 (Platinum Marshal)
Greek Champion 2019 


#34 The Prof

The Prof

    Colonel

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,549 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 27 October 2017 - 06:56 AM

Three years ago GaryLShelton and I proposed four changes to the ISF rules.  One of those changes was to not allow counter chasing, but this was rejected by ISF leadership.  They also rejected our other suggestions which we thought would be less-controversial, like 1) blocking distance chasing (chasing with one piece while threatening to trap with another), 2) Using a different criterion that would have cut down on the number of chasing moves allowed before a chase is blocked  - the ISF criterion of repeated board position allows up to 12 moves in a standard double chase - ours would have reduced that to 6 moves) and 3) acknowledging that a scout can indeed threaten a piece from distance - According to ISF, a scout is not considered to be threatening when it lines up with an opposing piece.  Thus, a scout can chase a spy (or piece that doesn't want to be revealed) all day if it has three squares to work with.    

 

As for changes for this site, I believe we should just implement current ISF rules.  If there are future opportunities to improve the official rules I'll work with ISF leadership to try to do that, and I'd be happy if others want to join with me in that cause.


  • Losermaker likes this

#35 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Marshal

  • WC Online Team
  • 3,965 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 October 2017 - 08:20 AM

@ Roeczak, the big difference between counter- and double(+) chasing is that in case there is double(+) chasing, there is one player doing it, in case of counter-chasing, both players are causing a stalemate. One of them can decide to stop causing it.


  • GaryLShelton likes this

sOoQsuN.png


#36 roeczak

roeczak

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,250 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 27 October 2017 - 08:23 AM

The one who is been chased can only stop with

A) deciding to not capture the piece he had originally traped with the 2 sq rule

B) allowing a piece that the opponent did not trap correctly with 2 sq rule to be captured.

Both of which seem unfair to the guy being chased.

Roeczak <----- Stratego YT channel
Highest Rating : 966 (Platinum Marshal)
Greek Champion 2019 


#37 roeczak

roeczak

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,250 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 27 October 2017 - 08:24 AM

The emoji i meant B )

Roeczak <----- Stratego YT channel
Highest Rating : 966 (Platinum Marshal)
Greek Champion 2019 


#38 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Marshal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 27 October 2017 - 10:57 AM

The Prof
Question regarding your distant chasing with a scout. I understand this is only applicable to a scout but what if a player is making distant chasing with an unknown piece that is not a scout but makes his opponent believe it is a scout ... how do you manage this in your proposed rules adjustments?
  • Don_Homer likes this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#39 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 27 October 2017 - 11:40 AM

My view on this:

Napoleon, Its too complex too make a difference between chasing with or without options. Its getting subjective and allowing a chaser to force the other player to go backwards is giving the 'illegal' chase too much power. I think isf rules are perfect for this.

Prof, I agree with ISF that distance chasing should be legal. Its getting too complex cause almost every move can be a distance chase. Every piece can be a spy and a scout. In most cases they are still unknown. However, maybe your proposal to cut down the amount of chasingmoves is usefull. I dont know why ISF turned that down. In offline tournaments the sportiveness rule can be used where unnecessary chasing (decided by referee) can be stopped by the referee.

Anyway, The most complicated rule is the counterchase (way better word than my "anti-chase interruption rule". I named it when I discovered this years ago). Let me first state that I use this rule to my advantage as most topplayers do. But I understand that not everybody likes the rule. I think its a bit unnatural rule. So it might be better to chance. However there should be no other negative consequences to it (I cant come up with one right now but we have to think about this too).

Edited by Don_Homer, 27 October 2017 - 11:42 AM.

  • Napoleon 1er likes this

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#40 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    Marshal

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,186 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 27 October 2017 - 06:09 PM

My view on this:

Napoleon, Its too complex too make a difference between chasing with or without options. Its getting subjective and allowing a chaser to force the other player to go backwards is giving the 'illegal' chase too much power. I think isf rules are perfect for this.

 

yes, after the clear explanations from Nortrom I agree. The ISF rules are good as they are talking of "forbidden moves" not of "double chasing situations". So if a player is making more chasing moves than the maximum allowed by the rules it shall be considered a double chasing and he has to stop it, independently whether the chased player can escape or not. The options available for the chased player are not the issue, only the proceeding with forbidden moves by the chasing player is.

At the end it means that in situations where the chased player remains with 2 miners and the chasing player with 2 higher pieces only will most likely give victory to the chased player if the flag is not open in a corner. If the flag is open in a corner the chasing player has better to go back put his 2 higher ranked pieces next to the flag and just move them back and forth. This has been demonstrated as a non double chase earlier on this forum with the enigma case. Alternatively if the chasing player has other movable pieces left he shall be obliged to move them or make a different move with one of the chasing pieces.

If we focus on the above I guess we have a clear situation of what has to be adressed by MT, only forbidden moves matters.


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




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users