16 lines
7.9 KiB
HTML
16 lines
7.9 KiB
HTML
|
---
|
|||
|
|
layout: post
|
|||
|
|
title: Self-indulgent musings on total knowledge strategy games
|
|||
|
|
date: '2008-12-23T11:44:00.000-05:00'
|
|||
|
|
author: Anna Wiggins
|
|||
|
|
tags:
|
|||
|
|
- go
|
|||
|
|
- chess
|
|||
|
|
- hnefatafl
|
|||
|
|
- Gaming
|
|||
|
|
modified_time: '2013-10-22T11:19:50.595-04:00'
|
|||
|
|
blogger_id: tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4209116010564764361.post-5897165812515549966
|
|||
|
|
blogger_orig_url: http://www.stringofbits.net/2008/12/self-indulgent-musings-on-total.html
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Total knowledge games are games in which all players involved have equal knowledge of the current state of the game, and the only factor that influences the game's future state is the actions of the players. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess">Chess</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)">Go</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hnefatafl">tafl</a> are three such games that I play periodically.<br/><br/>Recently, I pondered a fairly simple question: which of these games is the most complex? All of them are complex enough that new players have room to become stronger over time. Skill in these games has been traditionally praised as a virtue by each game's culture of origin. So, which game provides the greatest depth as a topic of study?<br/><br/><a name='more'></a>Before I consider the differences in the level of complexity of these games, let's look at how a few basic elements of the games compare. This will give us a fuller understanding of the factors that contribute to the games' complexity.<br/><h3>Symmetry</h3><br/>Chess and Go have in common that they are symmetric games - both players have the same resources at their disposal, and seek the same goal. In chess, the pieces for each player are arranged similarly at the start of the board, and each player tries to capture the other player's king. In Go, the board begins empty of pieces, and capturing territory is the goal for both players. In both of these games, neither player has a handicap evenly matched opponents will have an equal chance of winning.<br/><br/>Tafl, on the other hand, is asymmetric. One player, the defender, controls a king and his bodyguards, and tries to flee to one of the corners of the board. His pieces begin the game arranged in the board's center. The attacker, on the other hand, has his pieces along the four sides of the board. He also outnumbers the defender 2-1. Tafl also favors the defender; if two equally skilled players play each other, the defender is nearly guaranteed victory.<br/><h3>Board Size</h3><br/>Tafl and chess are played on fairly small boards - 8x8 for chess, and anywhere from 7x7 to 13x13 for tafl. The most common tafl board sizes appear to be 9x9 (Tablut) and 11x11 (Hnefatafl). I will be contemplating a hnefatafl board here, because that is the size on which I most commonly play.<br/><br/>Go, on the other hand, is played on a 19x19 board. This means that, in general, far more moves are possible at any given time in Go.<br/><h4>Spaces vs Intersections</h4><br/>While we're talking about boards, I will pause briefly to discuss spaces and intersections. In Go, your pieces are played on the intersections of the lines. In tafl and chess, your pieces reside in the spaces, or squares, between the lines. This fundamentally makes no difference at all. You could make a grid of 8x8 intersections instead of 8x8 spaces, and play chess on it. It would feel unnatural, perhaps, but only because you would be accustomed to the other convention. Likewise, you could play Go on a board of 19x19 spaces. In fact, some variants of tafl were played on a grid of intersections, such as Alea Evangelii, a tafl game played on a 19x19 board (you could, in other words, use a modern Go board to play Alea Evangelii).<br/><h3>Capturing</h3><br/>Go requires a player to surround an opponent's stones and 'cut him off' from all open spaces. Capturing, however, is not the point of the game, only a strategic element. This is also fundamentally true of tafl and chess; the ultimate goal is to surround the king; the capturing move is not strictly necessary. Tafl's capture rules are less straightforward than chess; you must 'flank' an opponent's piece (place your pieces on opposite, orthogonal sides of the opposing piece) to capture it. The king must be surrounded on all four sides (in most variants).<br/><h3>Construction vs Destruction</h3><br/>In chess and tafl, players begin the game with all of their pieces in place; pieces can be captured, but new pieces will never be added to th
|