tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post5880507303701851574..comments2023-09-24T05:45:23.811-05:00Comments on Paleoglot: Revisal to my Sinat gameGlen Gordonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-48650519600907026152009-06-30T14:03:02.960-05:002009-06-30T14:03:02.960-05:00Hans: "Effectively you are not waiting for a ...<b>Hans: <i>"Effectively you are not waiting for a One, but for a One-plus-x."</i></b><br /><br />More accurately, my "AvoidWater" function, added to the general strategy, simply erases from its memory the possibility of moving from 25 to the waters on a roll of "1" UNLESS it's the ONLY move left.<br /><br /><b><i>"Who is Lateesha named after?"</i></b><Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-38689157582989301192009-06-30T13:07:08.046-05:002009-06-30T13:07:08.046-05:00Take it easy, Glen!
1) I played 7 games against...Take it easy, Glen! <br /><br /><br />1) I played 7 games against what at first I thought was Seth. <br />"Seth" beat me 4 times. He seemed to play incredibly bad. He must have hypnotized me. <br /><br />2) I misanalysed. Landing on 25 is not nearly as bad as I thought. Effectively you are not waiting for a One, but for a One-plus-x. <br /><br />3) Who is Lateesha named after?ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-86361277745586181482009-06-29T18:07:27.466-05:002009-06-29T18:07:27.466-05:00Hans: "There are few exceptions. One is when ...<b>Hans: <i>"There are few exceptions. One is when you want to keep intact a small block to protect your pieces from long range (4 or 5) hits."</i></b><br /><br />I was thinking about this and it might be a next step. One of these next few days, I'll have to think about how I might translate that into a better algorithm. However, it seems that "running" is the core of the Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-25279631645153791862009-06-27T11:35:45.424-05:002009-06-27T11:35:45.424-05:00Hello Glen.
Switching at every opportunity may ...Hello Glen. <br /><br /><br /><i>Switching at every opportunity may in fact be a good overall strategy</i><br /><br />You are right. You should switch (almost) every time you can. This effectively is a form of "running". <br />There are few exceptions. <br />One is when you want to keep intact a small block to protect your pieces from long range (4 or 5) hits. <br /><br /><br /><i>, ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-81189060371555794862009-06-26T16:01:39.962-05:002009-06-26T16:01:39.962-05:00I've made updates in the past few days. See Si...I've made updates in the past few days. See <a href="http://paleoglot.blogspot.com/2009/06/sinat-graphics-revised-and-computer.html" rel="nofollow"><i>Sinat - Graphics revised and computer algorithm enhanced</i></a>.<br /><br />My new algorithm <i>Seth</i> is definitely better than the retarded monkey. Switching at every opportunity may in fact be a <i>good</i> overall strategy, despite what Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-32465724542797662642009-06-26T15:01:43.154-05:002009-06-26T15:01:43.154-05:00Hello Glen
"As for strategy: Whatever way y...Hello Glen<br /><br /><br /><i>"As for strategy: Whatever way you play Sinat, it almost invariably ends 1vs1 [...]"<br /><br />But can you *prove* that your assertion is true? You keep repeating this over and over again without basis or references. Is there some insight from Game Theory that I need to know?<br /><br />Obviously some strategies are still better than others so the ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-49220861498125964792009-06-24T17:36:07.696-05:002009-06-24T17:36:07.696-05:00Hans: "Also, I found different sets of rules,...<b>Hans: <i>"Also, I found different sets of rules, with 6 instead of 5, and blocks of three pawns (hereafter RW)."</i></b><br /><br />There are many sets of rules online and off. I'm only personally interested in ones most based on historical facts however. <br /><br />I've been also comparing Sinat to the <a href="http://www.gamecabinet.com/history/Ur.html" rel="nofollow">Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7202150793869184289.post-36539828154885897792009-06-24T15:30:56.084-05:002009-06-24T15:30:56.084-05:00Hello Glen.
Your rules (hereafter RG) differ fr...Hello Glen. <br /><br /><br />Your rules (hereafter RG) differ from those devised by Kendall (hereafter RK). <br />Also, I found different sets of rules, with 6 instead of 5, and blocks of three pawns (hereafter RW). <br /><br />RK (not fully explained in your link) state that pieces landing on 28 or 29 go back to the water, or to the ankh. <br />RW's sixes are not a bad idea, as the sticks ZUhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06733661299497804284noreply@blogger.com