I agree, it's no longer go if you add this kind of extra gamesmanship on top.
Of course it's sometime fun to talk about it as a kind of speculation. Don On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:38 PM, David Doshay <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, we could take on the rules from any one of a number of other games. > Each would have some advantage, perhaps some disadvantage. > > But why? > > Rather than complicate the rule set to nudge our programs in one direction > or another via a new reward function, why don't we just concentrate on > trying > to get them to play the game well? That seems hard enough to me. > > Cheers, > David > > > > On 27, Jan 2011, at 6:31 AM, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote: > > > Could a 'doubling dice'** encourage early resignation by programs? > > > > each program would have to forfeit a double game, if it played on and > lost the game, > > but could resign for a single loss. > > > > scores in earnest might need to be tallied in the public arena. > > though one would hope that the application designers..... > > > > regards > > > > Jonathan Chetwynd > > http://www.peepo.com > > > > **as per backgammon, either player can double, but then it is the > opponent's choice to resign or accept, > > and to redouble at their discretion, though this aspect may be ott. > > apologies if I missed the obvious, > > > > it seems I omitted the most severe error, playing on, when a game is > lost. > > in the thread: Are 4 'easy to avoid errors' common to all MC programs? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Computer-go mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
