|
|
 | | Re: 4x4 Tic Tac Toe...
|
| (...) Forget I mentioned 4x4. This is starting to remind me of stuff I always felt I needed to do, not what I wanted to do. Calum (18 years ago, 10-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: 4x4 Tic Tac Toe...
|
| (...) Or 9 mans Morris, with axels in holes: (URL) A> (18 years ago, 10-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: 4x4 Tic Tac Toe...
|
| (...) Jeeese - you made me dig up one of my old game theory texts :) I believe (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) that 3-in a row on anything board 3x4 or larger can always be won by the first player (if neither makes mistakes :) If you (...) (18 years ago, 10-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: Our the R-games too hard?
|
| (...) How about 2 TTT games... 3x3 for the dummies like me, and 4x4 for smarter people. Make them both marbles and just extend the grid. Some might make theirs compete on both based on different programs (or the same, with some different logic)... (...) (18 years ago, 10-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: 4x4 Tic Tac Toe...
|
| (...) It may be deterministic, but I doubt many could fit the entire solution tree into an RCX. How about making time a factor. In a cat's game, the faster playing bot wins (would need a way to time accurately, though). I think the complexity of (...) (18 years ago, 10-Aug-06, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
|
