It is currently Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:02 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: A realization about Go
Post #1 Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:37 am 
Beginner

Posts: 7
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 3
I had a realization about a Go-like game I invented, which led to a realization about Go itself. Curious what Go players think. See here.


This post by NickBentley was liked by: luigi
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A realization about Go
Post #2 Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:46 am 
Judan

Posts: 7812
Liked others: 2143
Was liked: 2742
I quickly looked at the new rules. One observation stood out to me.

"There’s no explicit territory definition. Territory emerges from the rules."

I think that that is a result of not having passes. That is the case with go. Nearly every variant of go without passes has some emergent concept of territory. :) The concepts of territory may differ, depending upon the rules.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A realization about Go
Post #3 Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:55 am 
Lives with ko

Posts: 238
Location: Spain
Liked others: 148
Was liked: 23
Rank: Low
GD Posts: 10
Bill Spight wrote:
I quickly looked at the new rules. One observation stood out to me.

"There’s no explicit territory definition. Territory emerges from the rules."

I think that that is a result of not having passes. That is the case with go. Nearly every variant of go without passes has some emergent concept of territory. :) The concepts of territory may differ, depending upon the rules.

The main insight (first presented in this game, as far as I know) is that capture scoring plus suicide enabled equals area scoring minus group tax (parity issues in tied games aside).

For reference, No Pass Go is quite different from Go with area scoring in that captures are half as worth in the former. Not so in Blooms!

(I'm the Luis mentioned in the article.)

_________________
Sum ergo non ero.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A realization about Go
Post #4 Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:18 am 
Gosei
User avatar

Posts: 1956
Location: Groningen, NL
Liked others: 195
Was liked: 1062
Rank: Dutch 4D
GD Posts: 645
Universal go server handle: herminator
What you call Free Go is basically equivalent to what is called Capture Go. Capture Go is generally taught with the goal of capturing 1 stone, then capture X stones for increasing values of X. It has a similar effect of arriving at the concept of territory naturally for large enough values of X.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: A realization about Go
Post #5 Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2018 6:36 am 
Judan

Posts: 7812
Liked others: 2143
Was liked: 2742
luigi wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
I quickly looked at the new rules. One observation stood out to me.

"There’s no explicit territory definition. Territory emerges from the rules."

I think that that is a result of not having passes. That is the case with go. Nearly every variant of go without passes has some emergent concept of territory. :) The concepts of territory may differ, depending upon the rules.

The main insight (first presented in this game, as far as I know) is that capture scoring plus suicide enabled equals area scoring minus group tax (parity issues in tied games aside).


Capture-1 with suicide enabled (no pass) equals territory scoring with a group tax.

Capture-N with suicide allows suicide of up to N-1 stones, which may produce values unknown in other forms of go.

Quote:
For reference, No Pass Go is quite different from Go with area scoring in that captures are half as worth in the former.


No Pass Go produces fractional territory values, not just half point values. No Pass Go with suicide produces infinitesimal territory values.

Quote:
Not so in Blooms!


Different no pass rules may produce different definitions of territory. :)

Edit:

Quote from the site:

"For sufficiently large values of X {the number of captures to win}, the game is like the original game: it evolves until only living blooms remain, and the leader at that point wins. It’s basically equivalent to area scoring (with a 3-point group tax)."

If the eyes are single point eyes, when there are no dame each player will sacrifice only one stone per move. At that point the game may be scored by territory scoring with a 3 pt. group tax. (With larger eyes the concept of territory may be different, as I mentioned above.)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:

At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?

— Winona Adkins

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group