BrainKing - 讨论板 (Chess variants (8x8))

监管者: WhisperzQ

, Mort

, Bwild

Chess variants (8x8)

including Amazon, Anti, Atomic, Berolina, Corner, Crazy Screen, Cylinder, Dark, Extinction, Fischer Random, Fortress, Horde, Knight Relay, Legan, Loop, Maharajah, Screen, Three Checks

For posting:
- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu)
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)

Community Announcements:
- Nasmichael is helping to co-ordinate the Fischer Random Chess Email Chess (FRCEC) Club and can set up quad or trio games if you send him a PM here.

讨论板列表
您未权限在该板张贴消息。只有最低脑兵级别的会员才允许张贴在该板。

状态: 所有人能发表

24. 一月 2007, 22:47:15

dresali

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

题目: Re: Cheversi imbalance

Just moving this Cheversi discussion from the Requests Board to here, so if you would like
to read the preceding posts, thats where they are ;)

AbigailII/Perfect information:
Say White has three equally good moves A, B, and C and Black has the Moves X, A',B' and C'.
X garanties a draw, A', B' and C' win against A, B and C respectively, but lose against the other two.
So Black should play X, but he might choose to play a mediocre move and get lucky and win.
In case of simultaneous placing of pieces, a player cant know the outcome of a game anymore
by solely doing enough calculation, so luck comes into play, hence there's no perfect information anymore.

AbigailII/Swap rule:
Of course in your example a swap rule wouldnt help.
That's because in that game there are no positions that are drawish.
But thats not the case in Cheversi.
If after any of White's possible first moves, Black is able to construct
a drawish position with his first move, then adding the swap rule after move 1
would cure the imbalance problem.

24. 一月 2007, 23:03:28

dresali

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

题目: Re: Cheversi imbalance

Ok, agreed, if White plays Qa1 in his first move, there probably wont be any drawish positions anymore
after Blacks first move, no matter what he plays,
so the restriction for White's first move might still be necessary.

24. 一月 2007, 23:16:32

AbigailII

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

题目: Re: Cheversi imbalance

dresali: I grant you that if there is a drawish move for black that a swap rule could "work" (although that would be a very different game, one that is decided on the first move). But it's not at all clear to me that, for any first move of white, there is such a move for black. Not that I really like games where blacks first move has to be a bad one.

As for your perfect information example, I'm a bit confused about your meaning of 'good' and 'mediocre'. Since all moves of white (A, B, C) can be beaten (A', B', C') and alternatively lead to a draw (X), I wouldn't qualify them as "good" moves. Although I guess that if white doesn't have any moves available that win, all moves are equally "good".

I still claim such a game would be a game of perfect information (nothing is hidden or determined by a dice roll). But I'm fine with you seeing it differently.

24. 一月 2007, 23:40:45

dresali

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

题目: Re: Cheversi imbalance

AbigailII:
Things are not determined by a dice roll, but by luck. Consider a game of rock paper scissors,
nothing is hidden there either, a single game of
it is still completely luck dependant.

And A,B and C are 'good', since if Black decides to
play A',B' or C', White will win 66% of the time,
so it would be irrational for Black to not choose X, so with everyone playing rationally, the game would end in a draw.

Concerning the swap rule, I see that its probably not as perfect as I first thought, since White can play really bad which leaves Black no 'bad enough' moves, so restrictions would still be necessary.
And all that bad play really isnt so nice at all, thats true ;)
Which still leaves this great game at a way too imbalanced state.