Re: [pbmserv-dev] WarpAndWeft End of game

[Lyman Hurd <lhurd@yahoo.com>]

In case it isn't blazing obvious, nobody is getting
paid for writing games!  That being said, this forum
is for discussing ways that they can be improved. 
Clearly not every suggestion is always followed but I
was concerned about some of the tone of the repsonses.

Cheers,

Lyman

PS What made me think of thi is that my next email
concerns a suggested optimization :-).

--- Phil Bordelon <phil@lsu.edu> wrote:

> Randall Bart wrote:
> > In WarpAndWeft Board 126 (below), I have lost. 
> There is no way for me 
> > to complete a vertical line, and if my opponent
> does not forfeit and 
> > occasionally takes a thread, he will inevitably
> complete the horizontal 
> > line.  Yet the program does not detect victory.
> > 
> > The ruke as written says "The first player to
> connect their two sides of 
> > the board with a continuous chain of Threads and
> Patches is the winner. 
> > Alternatively, the first player who has no valid
> play is the loser."
> > 
> > The second line is quite preposterous; you can
> always issue a 
> > threads/patches command.  The first line looks
> correct, yet is 
> > unnecessarily strict.  You can't move in your
> opponent's threads.  
> > There's no need to actually fill in your threads. 
> If you complete a 
> > line of patches (as Vitalik has done below) that
> should end it.
> 
> While it could be worded better, I hardly consider
> the second line
> preposterous.  If you have neither a valid Thread
> move or a Patch move
> available, then you have lost.  I, of course, should
> have realized that
> the rules were going to be attacked by rules lawyers
> when I wrote them,
> and for that I apologise.
> 
> And yes, the filling-in of threads is unnecessary. 
> I think Cam coded the
> pbmserv implementation out of the goodness of his
> heart, though, and it's
> up to his continued goodwill to made that
> optimisation.  That said, it is
> functionally equivalent to a version stating only
> the need for Patches, and
> a hell of a lot easier to say in plain English.
> 
> > On the same topic, in Patch Primary mode there's
> no reason to ever make 
> > a thread.  This causes the game to reduce to just
> the patches, which may 
> > make the game equivalent to Gale or some other
> game.
> 
> Yup.  I realized that after I proposed it.
> 
> P
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net
> with
> 	unsubscribe pbmserv-dev@gamerz.net
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
> 
>