Subject:
|
Re: Connect Four game issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:39:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
686 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Iain Hendry wrote:
> David Eaton's post exposes my fears. The logic behind this sounds so hard.
> I don't understand how to program that kind of stuff... I supose the best I
> could ever hope to do is look at what's been placed, and calculate sort of
> a... hmm. I guess "What's the best move THIS time?" kidna thing. Look
> for "if I drop one here, how many line up?" kinda thing for each of the 7
> scenarios and then drop it. Crud.
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. The only way to do this in the RCX world is to create
an algorithm that analyzes the board and figures out the best move, not
necessarily the move that will guarantee victory N moves down the road. Unless
there's anyone who's an advanced game theorist who knows that it's possible to
squeeze in the "perfect" algorithm, I don't think the fact that it's a "solved"
game will factor into it. (Though I'd be happy to be proven wrong! I've been
curious about the "perfect" algorithm for a while now)
You might be able to pull off a small look-ahead algorithm in addition, that
would effectively look, say, 4 moves in advance. That might fit into an RCX
somehow. But I don't think you can get it to the point where you'd look up 42
moves in advance. That's just too big for an RCX to handle. Heck, a look-ahead
of 9 was soaking up 200+ megs of RAM when I was calculating the above numbers!
(course you could reduce that by a factor of 4 pretty easily, since I was doing
1 byte per square, and theoretically you could do 2 bits per square)
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
| 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Connect Four game issues
|
| (...) 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)
|
72 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
