== Sci-fi / futuristic version? == 

 I was unaware when I recently picked up a copy of Stratego for the first time I wasn't getting the traditional version of the game.  Mine appears to be published by Spinmaster, mentions the "some assembly required" (putting stickers on the shield-like pieces), involves each player using 30 pieces on a 10 x 8 board, and uses the "higher is better" ranking system.  It's also rather sci-fi, with some of the ranks using power armor and others equipped with assault rifles or pistols and "carapace" style armor.  Most notably, the ranks are slightly different - the Spy is moved to a non-ranked piece like the Bomb or Flag (it loses to everything except the rank 10 Marshal, and even then only wins against the Marshal when attacking it, not defending against it), and a new Rank 1 piece is included, the "Spotter".  The Spotter can move and then use its special attack on the square in front of it (only, no other orthogonal direction).  The Spotter's special attack calls down an orbital strike, requiring the player to know what he's targeting - you guess a rank, and the other player must tell you what rank the targeted piece is.  If it is a Spy, Bomb, or Flag, they don't have to tell you which it is, only telling you that it is unranked (and thus can never be destroyed by an orbital strike).  If you correctly guessed the piece's rank, the piece is destroyed as though it had lost a battle, but the Spotter doesn't move into the square.  If you guess wrong, nothing else happens - the Spotter's special attack doesn't take him into battle with the defender. 

 It was only when I visited this site I discovered there was another way to play, with more pieces and no Spotter.  The Spotter quickly became my family's favorite piece for its ability to defeat any piece without dying on a mistake (although it IS close enough to whatever it targeted that the opponent can spend a turn to kill it with any piece, at least it still costs them a turn), even if it takes some foreknowledge.  I don't see this variant mentioned in the article, and thought I should bring it to the attention of bolder editors than myself.