View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ruben87 Gravon Administrator
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 1220 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: 04.05.2009 22:28 Post subject: question about a game ruben87 vs warlord |
|
|
Advantage Game question.
I dont know how to post a printscreen @ the forum so I will write down the situation:
Warlord has only 1 captain 1 lieutenant 1 sercheant and 1 bomb
ruben87 has only 6 bombs 1 scout 2 miners
a2 was a known bomb of warlord
a1 was unknown but I was sure it was his sercheant
b1 was unknown but I was sure it was his flag
I was nearby his flag: My scout was at f1
one miner at b3
one miner at d2
His Lieutant/Captain was at d1
His Lieutant/Captain was at c2
Then this happens:
Warlord: D1-C1
Ruben87: Scout f1-g1
Warlord: c2-b2 (attacking my miner
Ruben87 b3-c3
Warlord c1-d1 (attacking my other miner but without my fear cause when he hit it I grab his flag with the scout.
ruben87 Scout g1-f1
Warlord: b2-c2 (attacking my miner)
ruben87: c3-b3
Warlord d1-c1 And the old situation appeared.
We agreed a draw but I want to make sure this is legal, because it was a tricky situation. Fact is that he has 1 in between move (out of 4) where he didnt attack my piece.
Or did I play it the wrong way?
Hope someone can help.
Greetings Ruben87
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stratego Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003 Posts: 1123 Location: Germany
|
Posted: 06.05.2009 07:28 Post subject: |
|
|
hi ruben,
its not only that the situation was on board again before or that he attack
(better: threaten) on of your pieces.
the piece which was threaten must evade in the direct following move.
this is very important, because you can also threat a known bomb, but this
doesnt touch one of the rules, because the bomb cannot evade in the
direct following move.
maybe you should use the free setup and create the situation you had.
(open pieces of course)
then make a screen print and send it to me. i will post it for you and we
can discuss the moves.
stratego |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stratego Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003 Posts: 1123 Location: Germany
|
Posted: 08.05.2009 08:49 Post subject: |
|
|
hi ruben,
its ok and if you play like this, it ends in a draw.
warlord doesnt violate the more square rule (or two-square-rule within the more-square rule)
because you didnt always evade with a threaten piece, the moves are set to zero again and
the situation is a draw.
i think the position of your scout is better in middle.
then you could attack at left side the open flag or you can move down to
ground row (1) to attack from this side.
this would force more attention from warlord not to violate the m-s-r.
the server will count all moves and if one player violates a rule, he cannot make the move.
so maybe you could force an error, if you play 10 moves more.
(of course not for 50 moves - then please agree to a draw)
stratego |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ruben87 Gravon Administrator
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 1220 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: 09.05.2009 20:25 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Stratego. I get it now. So if Warlord defended well, I could not get his flag.
So is it right that all situations are calculated by the server and no illegal play can be played by the more square rule?
The scout central is indeed better thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stratego Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003 Posts: 1123 Location: Germany
|
Posted: 10.05.2009 17:52 Post subject: |
|
|
hi,
yes - the server checks all moves (and also the current with the last 100) if
a player violates
either the 2-s-r or the m-s-r. (also the 2-s-r within the m-s-r, because then
you are allowed to move
back to a square (1time more) , which would not be allowed if it was only
the m-s-r)
stratego |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ruben87 Gravon Administrator
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 1220 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: 13.05.2009 16:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Ok thanks, that makes it easy. Nice programme. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|