As a player and observer of both (but not someone who has done game programming) it's very hard to say.
The big wildcard for Arimaa is that we don't know how good humans can be, since the game is so unexplored. However, I think the current breed of Arimaa bots have a slim chance against the current best humans--taking a game against the top three is unlikely (< 10% win rate), but not quite impossible (as opposed to Go, where it seems effectively impossible until the engines gain at least a stone). > On Feb 22, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Petri Pitkanen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I think both are too fat for truly analytical answer. But number of people > working in computer go vs arimaa and number of people playing the two games > indicates that Go would be the 1st to have computer beating top humans. Last > time I logged in into arimaa server there were 11 people there. Drawing from > such a shallow talent pool coming up with good ideas will take huge time. > > And I do not think Arimaa has chance. It lacks the violent nature chess nor > is strategy as subtle as in Go - not to mention violent nature of Go which in > my games usually happens the wrong way around. And most importantly if I want > to play I can easily find someone to play chess with me, with bit of trouble > i would find someone to play Go but for Arimaa... I would need to teach > rules to someone. And in in these games competitive factor is huge, no > competition id there is no one to compete with. > > PP > _______________________________________________ > 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
