Jump to content


Photo

You Won't See This Too Often...


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,249 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 04 September 2018 - 09:22 AM

My opponent and I were down to our last movable piece each and I was curious if it made a difference whether I killed him or he me as to if one of us would get the win. As it turned out I got the positioning to attack him and it resulted immediately in this tie banner. But look at the message. It's very unusual. You won't see it too often! 😎

https://imgur.com/gallery/fjjYokA
  • Yellowhat, rgillis783 and TemplateRex like this

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#2 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 04 September 2018 - 10:00 AM

My opponent and I were down to our last movable piece each and I was curious if it made a difference whether I killed him or he me as to if one of us would get the win. As it turned out I got the positioning to attack him and it resulted immediately in this tie banner. But look at the message. It's very unusual. You won't see it too often!

https://imgur.com/gallery/fjjYokA


This is one part of the ISF rules that I disagree with. IMO, the player to move next should lose if he doesn't have a moveable piece, regardless whether his opponent also has no moveable piece left.
  • Wogomite likes this

I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#3 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 11:21 AM

Templaterex is smart and technically is not just his opinion, according to Stratego board game original and current rules which pre dates ISF, it reads and I quote "if you can not move or attack ON YOUR TURN then you must declare your opponent the winner". According to the rules Gary, you fulfilled your obligation of moving or attacking on your turn and your opponent could not. This technically should result in a win for you. Un fortanately, not a single online site, isf or any other Stratego organization honours this. I hope this changes one day as it would increase the demand for skill even further.
  • rgillis783, TemplateRex and L3AF like this

#4 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,249 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 04 September 2018 - 02:00 PM

I hope this changes one day as it would increase the demand for skill even further.

.
Really, though, it's a matter of sheer luck who would be the final person with the role of attacker. At least in the game I played. For one thing, each player has 8 scouts that can change the positioning of two final pieces in a gazillion ways. No one alive could plan for it. Besides, in the game above my opponent and I could have run around the lakes all day with each other and my only recourse would have been to file a draw refusal for the goal of what? A draw? Hmm.

If my opponent knows he will lose if he allows me to attack him, it will only cause him to run around the lakes interminably, so the draw ending is better, I think.
  • Don_Homer likes this

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#5 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 02:29 PM

Gary, in a position where a player could run the lake to avoid losing the final exchange, he would indeed do so and would end in a draw anyway. For the player that had the momentum preventing his opponent from running the lake, this would be intentional and saught after hence demanding more skill to do so. It causes players to have to think further in advance. There is no luck to it, it's only luck if neither opponent knows what they are doing.
  • TemplateRex likes this

#6 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,249 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 04 September 2018 - 05:16 PM

Ryan, if each player only has the same one piece remaining, say a sergeant, and that piece can roam over at least three squares, and both flags are protected, HmmNess seals the deal on any possible ending other than a draw, no matter who is playing.

But, I'll give you this. If there were an advantage at the end of the game to attacking one's opponent's final but equal piece versus being attacked at the end, I'm sure some astute players could recognize the situation and profit from it. I'm sure they could.

That said, my point is that there's no way anyone could plan for this eventuality very far in advance. Every single move of a scout by either player that is an even number of squares alters this final scenario all throughout the game.

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#7 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 05:43 PM

Gary is right if you ask me. If the 2 players have a decent level they can recognice the situation and prevent that their piece is getting hit. And you get situation where a miner is running from the other miner, just because he is getting hit first. This will lead to the Lucky other miner winning the game. This is just a Lucky 50/50 win. Also similar situations happen already without this rule where one player has to move first with various consequences.

 

I dont see why they should change this rule other than nostalgic reasons. 


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#8 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,818 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 05:53 PM

Gary, in a position where a player could run the lake to avoid losing the final exchange, he would indeed do so and would end in a draw anyway.


Yes and anyway the rule that says that a player cannot endlessly pursue a piece that cannot be captured is valid, so if he does not accept the draw it may turn against him.
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#9 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:01 PM

Maybe T-Rex can provide us with some scenarios that might show an end game exchange that involves luck but until he or someone else does, I am not able to come up with any in my head. A true draw is still a draw 100% of the time. A final exchange will always show the attacker to hold momentum and control in the end game over his opponent.
  • TemplateRex likes this

#10 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,655 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:02 PM

You can sort of plan it ahead, but it would totally ruin the game of barrage.

 

It's more than fine as is.

 

Dcis9rM.png

 

(All pieces known, red to move).


  • Don_Homer, texaspete09 and UnladenSwallow like this

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#11 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:02 PM

Maybe T-Rex can provide us with some scenarios that might show an end game exchange that involves luck but until he or someone else does, I am not able to come up with any in my head. A true draw is still a draw 100% of the time. A final exchange will always show the attacker to hold momentum and control in the end game over his opponent.

What about my miner example? Just 1 miner each.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#12 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:04 PM

Exactly Nortrom, blue put himself in better position here. Red could have prepared better but as you can see, blue was proactive while red was a bit behind in his preparation.
  • TemplateRex likes this

#13 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:05 PM

What about my miner example? Just 1 miner each.


What example, can you build a template using Dennis Board Creator?

#14 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:07 PM

You can sort of plan it ahead, but it would totally ruin the game of barrage.

 

It's more than fine as is.

 

Dcis9rM.png

 

(All pieces known, red to move).

 

This is another example I think it would change the game dramatically. ''Ruining'' is arguabel. But this might not be just a Lucky win for blue. I think the miner example is a better example to show the luck factor of this rule change.


  • Wogomite likes this

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#15 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:10 PM

What example, can you build a template using Dennis Board Creator?

You are a good enough player to see it with your imagination. Just 2 bombed flags and 2 miners opposite to each other in the middle lane for example. The Lucky miner wins because the other has to back down. 


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#16 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:27 PM

You are a good enough player to see it with your imagination. Just 2 bombed flags and 2 miners opposite to each other in the middle lane for example. The Lucky miner wins because the other has to back down. 

Now I think of it. In many situations the outcome is no different from the current rule (depending on where is the flag/ how many spaces to the flag for both miners). There often is a lucky miner too… We might need some more complex situations on board editor after all…  Maybe the rule suggesting is not changing so much as you might think.


Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#17 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:37 PM

Now I think of it. In many situations the outcome is no different from the current rule (depending on where is the flag/ how many spaces to the flag for both miners). There often is a lucky miner too… We might need some more complex situations on board editor after all… Maybe the rule suggesting is not changing so much as you might think.

;)

#18 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:46 PM

In draughts, 1 on 1 endgames are almost always drawn if both parties can make it to the promotion line, similar to how 1 on 1 Stratego endgames with identical ranks are drawn if one party makes it to the lakes. But if the final 2 draughts pieces are in direct opposition, the player who has to move first, loses. This might seems lucky, just as Gary and Don Homer are arguing here for the similar situation in Stratego (although there it is the first mover who wins).

 

Six times world champion draughts Harm Wiersma once wrote in one of his books (emphasis mine):

 

If a game ends in opposition, this may seem a coincidence. After all, how is it possible to steer from the 20 to 20 starting position to a 1 to 1 where the opposition is just right? This is indeed impossible. But an opposition win is often no coincidence. If you look closely at the following examples, it will be noticed that the opposition win is usually forced from a slightly advantageous position. The side with the most possibilities can steer the game and thus enforce the favorable opposition.

 

I believe the same is true in Stratego. 


Edited by TemplateRex, 04 September 2018 - 09:20 PM.

  • Wogomite likes this

I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#19 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 04 September 2018 - 06:56 PM

But, I'll give you this. If there were an advantage at the end of the game to attacking one's opponent's final but equal piece versus being attacked at the end, I'm sure some astute players could recognize the situation and profit from it. I'm sure they could.

 

The idea to use a tempo-gaining or losing scouting move to obtain the two-squares advantage in endgames is not new. I've commented on this theme occurring in several YouTube videos. Right now, the 1 on 1 endgame with identical pieces is the only endgame where the two-squares rule does not matter. It makes a small percentage of games drawn that could have been decisive. Fewer draws is always better IMO.


I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#20 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 748 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 04 September 2018 - 07:04 PM

You can sort of plan it ahead, but it would totally ruin the game of barrage.

 

Your example shows red being late to defend his flag lane. So blue has pressure in this game. A draw under the ISF rules changes into a blue win. So fewer draws and more wins. I would not call that "ruining the game of barrage". You yourself described barrage as "a race to the flag" in a short TV interview this WC, and here blue is slightly closer in the race, so why not reward that with a win? :)

 

If you could show me a position where a red win under ISF rules would change into a blue win under "no moves left, loses", then I might change my mind. I can't think of such a position, but perhaps they exist (I also found such positions when thinking about the 3-times vs 2-times repetition under the two-squares rule).


Edited by TemplateRex, 04 September 2018 - 07:08 PM.

I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users