Comments by ezze
Sorry for chipping in again. I submitted, but the Step 3 just appeared as a blank page; however now the game categories appear in the "Your Unreviewed Submissions" page, so it's fine. Right?
I honestly think all this "human vs computer" thing is nonsense as it's comparing totally different things.
In one side you have a group of computer scientists and mathematicians that model the game in a way it can be understood and played by a machine, it is all about making a mathematical model and reducing the solution space to the most powerful moves; in the other side you have a person that learnt playing normally doing games and studying. A Chess player can study how Deep Blue was implemented, but this won't make him playing much better. At the end of the day it's comparing apple and orange.
Anyway. What makes a game hard for computers? Usually it is:
- Search space (how many meaningful moves you can do?)
- Long term effect (the move I do now for all long it affects the game?)
- Hidden information and it's counterpart: what information I can get deduce from the game state?
- Number of rules (exceptions and special case makes computer programming much more difficult)
For example Go was unbeaten by computer for so long for the first two reasons, Magic The Gathering (a subset of it actually) is still unbeaten for the last two.
So I guess if you really want to develop a game just to make life to computer scientists and mathematicians difficult you have to point to increase all the point points as much as possible. However, it's very difficult to obtain a game that is FUN. Because if you overdo to most humans the game will appear random.
Personally I would point to a mix between Gess (but with a larger board) and Netrunner card game...
About making submissions. I sent a submission email to the chessvar yahoo address one week ago, how long it usually requires to get an answer?
Bario. Pieces are undefined until they move. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]This looks really an exciting idea. Did you consider to add Fairy pieces to the mix?
Sorry, another question. In general it is possible to capture up to one enemy piece, but is it possible to capture and immobilize in the same move? (A "joint lock + elbow strike" if you will) You can imagine when it might happen, the Hand moves and lands on a enemy piece immobilizing it, at the same time a Hand-connected Limb moves and captures. According to the wording of the rules I'd say it is possible, but I just want to be sure. While I am here I also do an extra "meta" question, I have an idea for a variant. But I am not sure it makes sense or I am missing some details; what is the best way to proceed? Simply write it down, send it, and await for comments?
I played few games with a friend and I kinda liked it. However, I felt that the starting position is a bit unnatural, did you consider different setups? In one game we let the players decide, you could setup the pieces as you wanted (as long all the rules were respected) in the first three rows. White first, Black second, game as usual. In my opinion it was a better game because we actually managed to use the Hair.
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.