 | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Iain Hendry
| | | | (...) I don't believe so! (...) You bring up a good point we haven't touched on yet. If we do opt for an IR "your turn" signal (which, from what I've been reading, is what we're steering away from now), we'll have to assign numbers to people to use (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —David Eaton
| | | | | (...) To give some reference for plausibility, a look-ahead will reveal (I think): Look-ahead | Max Possibilities ---...---+---...--- 1 | 7 2 | 49 3 | 238 4 | 1,120 5 | 4,263 6 | 16,422 7 | 54,859 8 | 184,868 9 | 821,283 So, you're entirely right. (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Connect Four game issues —Jennifer L. Boger
| | | | | Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>: (...) Wouldn't you only have to look ahead one step at a time? The opponent only has 7 choices on any given turn. It's pretty much impossible to say like playing a computer in chess, figure out how the game (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | |
