Well No, this games game lot harder. Even when point matter, 1st goal is to win the game in traditional sense to get any points at all. Which make just as hard as normal game. Then comes huge risk assesment risks involved. Lets assume - not so rare case - that you can go for the throat or attack mildly to secure some points. In Normal go most players - if they are willing to use the time - can make score estimate with 10 pt accuracy and use that as a guidance. In Hahn go the assessment comes lot harder and involves fuzzy variables that are hard to estimate by computer or human as well. But this is exactly kind of thing where human reasoning can give good results.
Petri 2009/11/23 Don Dailey <[email protected]> > I am estimating that this is a simpler game but I could be wrong. I think > simpler games favor computers. I think it's simpler because I am a weak > player and I think more in terms of total points rather than winning games > (in my beginners mind there is no difference even though objectively I know > better, but it's too much for me to process.) Even strong players do > this as a shortcut to make it "easier" to think about their next move, but > they are more aware of concepts like, "I MUST win this chunk of the board > or I will lose the game." > > So it seems pretty evident to me that this is a simpler concept to grasp > and play by and thus one that computers would do better at relative to good > human players who are much better at risk assessment than computers. > > I won't go so far as to say that this eliminates the element of risk from > the game, but it seems obvious to me that it is an easier way to think > about the game. > >
_______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
