I have a game in the december ultra fast standoff tournament which I lost. Now I dont mind losing, atleast not when I derserve to lose. How ever the game is finished before I can move again. It simply states, my opponent (someone, dont remember the name) has won the game.
Why has he won, because his piece is stucked at the single cornor. Yes that is loss, but only if it is my opponents turn, not when it is my turn to move, as I still have a legit move to make.
How did my opponent ended up there, simple. He had to hit a piece of mine to get there. Afterwards (atleast that was my plan) I could move my piece in the home row the other direction so my opponent had a hit to king, a legal move. Even better, my opponent was losing the game, since he only had forced moves (hits) to make all the way untill I runned out of pieces.
Now the game I am refering to is: #416598 (if that helps any). And incase my English is terrible, which I presume it is, English isn't my primary language. So if I am not making any sense right now, then I am sorry, but I simply have other idea on how to say it.
Thanks,
Gycixi0n
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
I was the recipient of the win, and there was no one more surprised than myself when the game ended naming me the victor. Although he had 5 pieces and I had 1, clearly I was going to lose in 3 moves. I like winning with the best of them, but there was no way I should have won that one. So I agree with niloc and gycixion, if possible please fix this problem.
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
Well this is an interesting situation. Basically, your opponent made his move, and at the end of his move he was trapped and so the site declared the game over. But what you're saying is that the game shouldn't be over because on your next turn, you'll make it so he can move again by moving one of your pieces out of the way (since this is Anti-Checkers, and you don't want him trapped).
Right now, the site says the game is over if either player can't move at the end of a player's turn, but what you're suggesting is that the game should only be over if the player whose turn it is can't move.
Yes that is how it works on different gaming sites (brainking for excample). That is how I learned to play the game. Because in certain situations you can take advantage of those situations. Current rules is only good for the person who normally (if the opponent has a fair understanding of the game) is in a losing position. While it isn't fair towards the player who is suppose to have the move.
But that's my opinion :-\
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
In addition to my game, I just spotted another game ( http://www.pocket-monkey.com/game.jsp?instance=422634&histTurnNo=41 which has the same 'problem'. (yes I like to know how my opponent(s) play like, helps me understanding what they are trying to do) It shouldn't have been loss, even better with 1 vs 4 (in that situation) it's near to impossible to win (for the person with 1 piece left). Offcourse there are situations where 1 piece is enough to win, but then you are depending way to much on your opponents way of play. But then again, sofar I have almost only played players who take the 'anti' to serriously (here on pocket-monkey). So I wouldn't be surprised a bit if there are players who disagree with me on that.
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
Since so far no one else has weighed in with an opinion, I've asked some of the players who play anti-checkers a lot to give me their thoughts on this. -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
Well, so far we have opinions from Gycixi0n, niloc, me, and two people who wrote to me privately. And we all agree that the game shouldn't end if you can't move at the end of your turn, only if you can't move at the _beginning_ of your turn.
Sadly, that's harder to do than it should be, but I'll get on it unless someone weighs in with a really good counter-argument. But it'd have to be pretty good. :-) -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
Re: Small 'bug' in Anti Checkers (Stand off) script/rules.
I agree with GycixiOn. Both the situations described are from victory for black, since is the adversary that can't move in is turn. Is that way that I play from many years.
I hope this help you decide wath to do :-)
Greetings to all.
DuLac
Forum
software by
Crowder Software Pocket-Monkey and the Pocket-Monkey logo are trademarks of T.J. Crowder and Jock Murphy. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
