FG: Go 12:"Even Older School Revisited"

[joncha]

Infinite spy sleaze was used against me first, sir.

[snoopy369]

Shockingly, I completely agree with Ljube.

And yes I was aware that you can't use and build a spy

Heck, all Spaced needed was a SPY to stop this. If he'd had a spy built, he'd have been able to send it against one of us on our 'build' turn, and stop it right there.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by joncha
Yes, this kind of sleaze is why counterspy was made in the first place. Clearly it is insufficient.

I'd go for them being buildable, unspyable, 2 maximum, with none to start.

Truth.

[Ljube]

What is truth?

[Ljube]

Originally posted by joncha
Infinite spy sleaze was used against me first, sir.

Infinite spy sleaze was eliminated when the provision that you can't build a spy and use a spy in the same turn was added to the rules.

This didn't prevent you and your allies from abusing the spirit of the rule in GO5 when the four of you allied to create a spy-deadlock. This and not the infinite spy sleaze you suffered caused the addition of anti-spy to the rules. One of the people spied in that game was the unfortunate Spaced Cowboy.

[joncha]

And now we see that the fix doesn't work as intended. Thus the need for a change to how counterspies work.

[Spaced Cowboy]

I agree with Joncha, this is two games where I've been in a pretty good position at the end of the game only to be hosed by tag-team spying.

For the record, I did save one of my anti-spies for last. As I used one earlier for a crucial attack, much like I used the second one. But I should have saved a spy.

Ya know what, I have no chance at this game and will not be sending any more orders. Do whatever you will.

[civman2000]

The thing is, at a certain point, you will cease to be the strongest player. At some point the alliance will no longer be in snoopy's best interest. As long as allied victories are banned, no alliance can be unstoppable. Perhaps eventually the allies will be strong enough that they could crush you, but by that time one ally or the other might have other ideas.

[Whoha]

doh.

it is in snoopy's best interest to prolong this so that my tonnage advantage can be overcome.

[Whoha]

How about spy weariness so that a player can only be spied on 3 times in a row(the max # of spies a single player can have), and on the 4th turn he is unspyable, then it reverts back.

[Hercules]

That might be hard to track, especially in the early game.

But it is an idea.

[Whoha]

erm 3 consecutive times in 3 turns.

[Jaguar]

That's not a bad solution.

Obviously, in the late game, the spy gets way too powerful. We need to come up with a fair solution to that problem. Early game, spies are roughly at parity with shields, and sometimes weaker, but late game, the spy is superior.

I think we should think up solutions for that, and have two referenda next signup: default TTD, and spy control.

[snoopy369]

I think we should wait a game or two before deciding that the results of ONE game out of many show an imbalance.

[Jaguar]

Well, it's never been in dispute that spies surpass shields in value in the endgame. Controlling one of the 3 or 4 remaining players is worth far more than being able to bunker at that point. Especially because you can't build a new special while using a shield, but you can build a new special while using a spy. Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily.

However, the infinite spy sleaze is definitely a problem that needs to be eliminated. The first use was in GO 2, where Smiley was way behind in fleet size, so he used spies repeatedly to keep the attack away while bolstering his own fleet. It was after that game that the build-a-spy use-a-spy ban was implemented, IIRC.

This killed spy sleaze by a single player, but now it's doable by multiple players, although it requires a lack of counterspies. Spy sleaze has been weakened, but it still exists, and I would argue that this isn't a good thing.

Floor is open for suggestions.