On 09/04/09 2:34 PM, "Zulli, Louis P" <[email protected]> wrote: > Last from me. > > Your example is essentially saying that gnubg should pick the interpretation > that maximizes the user's chance of winning, as if that is surely what he > intended. This is certainly one possible algorithm. > > However, another algorithm is to never interpret a continuous slide as pick > and pass. > > I prefer the latter, but the important thing is that there be some method that > program consistently follows. I don¹t disagree with the concept of consistency. For example it may be intuitive for some that the bot always assume the higher die is moved first (Assuming using the higher roll is legal of course) This is how I personally would expect it to be treated (And that¹s simple personal bias). From my viewpoint the hit or no hit is not the intuitive criteria. My criteria would also make other situations simple. For example if you drag from the 24 to the 13 on a 6-5 roll and lets say the opponent has a blot on the 18 and 19pt which - course should the bot take? If you use a consistent method of always using the high roll first then you¹d know ahead of time what the bot will do in this case too.
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
