New rules for Fendo

In agreement with the author of the game Fendo - Dieter Stein - https://spielstein.com/ a small modification of the rules has been made. It is now possible to close a region if there is more than one stone of the same color in it.

This should prevent situations like in games #2376656 or #2375837 where the blue player cannot make a legal move.

It will also speed up the endgame in the game.

I appreciate it, Richard! That should eliminate any need to pass a turn I can think of, and probably simplifies the game logic a bit as well.

It would be interesting to remove the extra stones and put them back in play, let only one to define the territory. But that would be a completely different game.

This rule change has a big effect on strategy, namely now you can play to trap several opponents pieces in a small area. I do not like the idea of changing the rules while games are in progress.

...it does, doesn't it? I recall under the previous rules having to make a lot of moves that for me were sub-optimal (not being able to build a specific wall and so having to open the area up again if I moved away) because of the old rule.

Thinking more on it, retaining of the old rules and simply adding a pass option would be better.

The new gaming site "Abstract Play" also has Fendo, but at that site, the rules are different, namely you can only have one stone of the same color in a closed area. This rule, as implemented at Abstract Play, is as stated on all the rule pages. So that means that Fendo played at Littlegolem is a DIFFERENT variation than the game played at Abstract Play (since at LG, you can have 2 or more stones of the same color in a closed area). This rule DOES affect the strategy play of the game, so beware of the differences! For the record, I prefer the littlegolem rule change, but I strongly suggest you put this rule on the rules page to avoid confusion.

This rule is not implemented in mobile app, at least on my iPhone. Not in ’analyse’ mode nor in playing mode. I lost ole game because I played it by my phone. I only thoght ”rules seen to ne changed again…” :)

My phone "corrected" my text automatically. Real message:
This rule is not implemented in mobile app, at least on my iPhone. Not in ’analyse’ mode nor in playing mode. I lost one game because I played it by my phone. I only thought ”rules seem to be changed again…” :)

I cannot play fendo in my browser of my phone and cannot play this move in the app... th8s means I
I feel that this not playing fair games....

Game 2537564

I think I can inclose 2 stones.

do you mean game this game 2437564?

Did you resolve your issue?

Have you tried playing on a desktop computer or desktop mode on your phone?

I confirm this is the case, I can do it only when playing on PC which is really weird

I confirm it as well - enclosing more than one stone works only on desktop.

Has something changed for Fendo on LittleGolem? Seems like this modifcation ("it is now possible to close a region if there is more than one stone of the same color in it") has been removed.

Yes, I just noticed this as well, at least on the analysis board. I think the rules have changed in the middle of our games, and that messes up our games, as all those plans and strategies were based on different rule set. I think we should pause our games and appeal to the webmaster.

I agree, not sure if this is intended or not but if this modification is removed, then we go back to the problem described in the beginning. Also personally I think this modification makes the game much more interesting, both tactically and strategically.

I agree with Force and Ray. I think I also saw a "pass" button in analysis mode but I don't see it anymore (?).

Anyway, introducing a rule change in the middle of a game - and without announcing it in any way - is, to say the least, rather dubious.

I have to agree with the author that the original Fendo rules are better. That's why this change has been made. I'm just surprised that some players figured out so quickly that the rules had been changed—I thought it was unusual for this change to affect existing games. If the result of a game is really affected by this, I can undo the moves. Unfortunately, the change is not yet in the mobile app (!) – only on the website and when checking moves. I hope that the rules are now fully in line with the original author's rules.

It is NOT cool to change the rules mid game. If new games use the "new" rules, then that is fine, but you changing the rule set mid game messes up strategies. I would have played differently with the new rules! Please restart all the championship games to move one and we can replay the games using the newly implemented rules.

The games that are already complete can stand, or start over. whichever is fine. But the games that are in progress are now messed up.

Agree with Ray, it's a mess now. Although I'd opt for rather reverting the recent change and coming back to the rule set which everyone here is used to already.

I also prefer reverting back to the rule set we were using, at least for the current games. I play with both rule sets on two different sites (the other site abstractplay.com), and the strategical play is significantly different in the endgame depending on the rule set.

I like apple pie and I like macaroni and cheese but it's going to be upsetting if my apple pie suddenly tastes like macaroni and cheese midway through eating it, you know?

Richard, sometimes your communication is great, but many times things just... happen... on this site and it's left to us to gradually realize something's off and talk to each other figure out what changed and when. Other times, like here, a potentially jarring change is just implemented without any prior discussion with the users it affects. I know this one was meant well, but talking to us beforehand could have found an implementation that works for everyone. Across the past 28 months everyone had gotten used to the new rules.

A suggestion I have (which could have been better implemented before all of this, but it's not too late) is to simply make the rules allowing enclosure of multiple same-color pieces a variant of Fendo. Put the old Fendo games (pre-July 2023) in as standard games and the newer ones as variants, and then of course any game starting now would be a standard one, and allow people to choose from here on out. If there's a way, any games that started under the allowed multi=enclosure rule and ended after it was removed should be rolled back to before the change was made. Otherwise, I agree with Ray about just restarting them from the beginning.

Out of curiosity, how did this change affect games that were suddenly in illegal positions when the rules were reverted to the original, pre-July 2023 ones?

I'm very sorry. It's quite difficult to change the rules of the game on this type of server. It's not like online gaming. What's more, these rules are now in two places (server, client). I suggest restarting the existing games in the championship.

I think there are couple of separate aspects here:
1) Changing rules for existing games is always bad and lack of communication does not help. To me most fair way is to revert rules to previous one and then figure out what to do. Restarting existing games is not perfect solution either, as some of them may be already decided even if they have not finished yet.
2) Why do we want to revert rules to the old ones in the first place? New rules had a purpose and have addressed some problem with original ruleset that inventor has not foreseen.
3) This is of course very subjective, but in my experience this is not a small tweak in the rules that only addresses some edge scenarios. As Ray said, it has huge impact on the endgame, but I would also argue at middle and early game as well, there are certain stategic principles to strive towards in old rules that totally don't make sense in the new one. I have played both rulesets, but I believe that what we had when championship started is MUCH better. It is difficult to go into details in forum post, but in my opinion ability to enclose multiple pieces makes the game much more dynamic, creates much more variety and asymmetry in positions and adds depths to strategic assessment. Without this ability in my view games are more boring - I could get some examples to illustrate what I mean, but I would need more time (and not sure if it changes anything in the end). Therefore if for whatever reason original (and current - not sure how to call these variants) must stay, I would strongly advocate for having at least 2 variants on site (maybe also play with board size as variant).

I like Force's idea, I was thinking about having multiple variants as a possibility also while i lay in bed last night. I would play both variants!

Perhaps some kind of "FreeFendo" where a fence can be placed anywhere. Including fencing off empty areas. Including creating multiple areas where both players' stones are located.

Funny, because basically few days ago I was discussing with a friend implications of a rule that would allow to fence off empty areas :D

For now, the game is played according to the original rules (no passing, a bordered area can have more than one stone of the same color).

Thanks Richard! I really appreciate taking into account voice of the (suprisingly small) Fendo community! I'm happy to discuss any further developments or variants.

Yay, nice, thanks Richard!

Thank you Richard