2 Responses

  1. bateleur
    bateleur February 10, 2013 at 1:37 pm |

    Shame I missed ‘s comment on the original thread. The problem isn’t revert battles, the problem is this:

    <start with any sequence of ‘place’ actions>
    * Player A makes a ‘move’ rather than a ‘place’.
    * Player B always reverts that move [*].
    * Player A now cannot opt for move and must place. Therefore player A’s previous move was a (weakly) dominated option.

    Therefore all ‘move’ actions were irrelevant. This is not the same as a revert battle, which takes the form of an endless loop.

    I like ‘s proposed rule in terms of forcing the game to progress, but there are still things I don’t like about it:

    * The “optional” part is really inelegant, because except in very obscure corner cases it will always be correct to take the move.
    * It makes it extremely cheap to disrupt whatever your opponent is doing, which places a heavy emphasis on fortunate draws over strategy.
    * I worry that it significantly favours the last player who gets a move. (Although this is just conjecture.)


    [*] Unless player A’s move action was suboptimal, of course. That could happen in a real game, but isn’t interesting.

    Reply
    1. undying-admin
      undying-admin February 10, 2013 at 3:58 pm |

      I worry that it significantly favours the last player who gets a move.

      I worried about this too, but am doing so slightly less now, because it seems in practice that the last player gets to either disrupt the opponent or do something good for themselves, but only rarely both. (Without a move option of some sort, the last play is dictated, which I think is undesirable.) But this is one of the things I want to see strong players get their hands on, because it might be I’m underestimating the advantage.

      which places a heavy emphasis on fortunate draws over strategy

      This is my main concern at the moment. Again, it would be good to see two players actually playing with strategy, to see how much of it survives.

      I guess there are tweak rule options available, restricting the capabilities of the move, if needed. I’ll have a think about that,

      Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.