Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Matteo Perlini wrote on Mon, Jan 7, 2013 02:36 PM UTC:
Hi Kenneth,

you are right. It is more important the horizontal of action (the exponent)
than the branching factor (the base) for that exponentiation formula. But I
believe that the formula num_turns^branch_fact is not a reliable measure
for the depth of a game.

I have two arguments:

1. We should count the number of important decisions per turn, not the
general number of move per turn. Take this stupid game played on a goban:
in every turn the player drop a single stone, the winning player is the
last dropping player. This game is as deep as Go with that formula,
actually it has zero depth.

2. If we have an opaque and/or a highly tactical game (with zero strategy)
that has an average of 300 turn, those turns don't add extra depth to the
game.

About the first point, we usually can ignore it. But I believe the second
point is important for designing a game.

If we want true deep games, difficult for AI, we have to focus on big
branching factor and extremely stratigical games. In my view a strategical
game is a game in which is "easy" to look ahead and that this looking
ahead is the central skill for winning the game.

I’m trying to follow this way designing my cv Kingdrops:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=29503

Edit Form
Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.