- Created Thursday, January 28th 2016 @ 00:43:20
I have a question about the definition of "draw".
In this game , at Round 53, there is a big square that nobody could won on the top-right.
At "Additional Rules" on this page , in paragraph 2, it is said that when your opponent sends you to a big square that is already settled, you may place your next move anywhere on the field. In Round 55, it is displayed that 1P could place its move on top-right big square. According to this case, the top-left big square is considered as "not settled (not draw)" because the big square has one blank small square yet.
Is this understanding correct?
DeveloperCreated Thursday, January 28th 2016 @ 08:51:51
Yes you are right in your understanding of how the engine works currently. But as I'm looking at the game I think we might want to disable that top-right big square because it already is a draw. I'll think about that and fix it if needed.
- Updated Thursday, January 28th 2016 @ 15:03:25
@Jim: I faced the issue myself, but I think you should NOT change this. Continuing on a board that has a winner makes no sense (and it allows the player to start to win always), as it allows states like this:
X_O XXO XOO
With an unclear outcome. Should be a win for O or X (based on ho won first (or last)) or should it be a draw?
This situation on the other hand will never lead to such ambiguous states, but gives players the options to force their opponent to 'waist' a move, or to (by playing it themselves) force opponents to a square afterwords.
If you, however, decide to apply this, the consequence should be that the game is terminated when no player can theoretically win any move.
DeveloperCreated Thursday, January 28th 2016 @ 15:15:22
No in the above example you were able to make a move in a big square that was already a draw. I might want to make this move illegal.
- Updated Thursday, January 28th 2016 @ 22:53:52
Sorry to my insufficient explanation,
Here I was intended to ask about the cases like these,
that NO player could win the game.
Here, it is discussed that whether this should be taken as a "draw" or not because if these cases are not taken as a "draw", players would not waste their hands in vain.
However, by taking these cases as "not draw yet", we could widen the variety of tactics, like forcing one's opponent to play on that square in vain, and confirming its next move simultaneously.
Above discussion is about the small-game, but the same can be said on big-game, but in this case it should become a draw instantly because it is truly wasteful.
- Created Friday, January 29th 2016 @ 17:16:13
@Jim: I understood that. As stated: I can live with both, but think that allowing that will be nicer than blocking it. Just my 2ct.