Author |
Topic: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games (Read 521890 times) |
|
hyperpape
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7113
Gender: 
Posts: 80
|
 |
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1050 on: Nov 30th, 2012, 10:51pm » |
|
on Nov 28th, 2012, 3:58pm, christianF wrote:
By that time I guess I won't be thinking outside my box, and neither will you  . |
|
I'm not old to anyone who has graduated college, so Havannah could conceivably double in interest once or twice in my lifetime. And the real key to my point of view is that the analysis that's been done of Havannah is so limited. It's far eclipsed by the much younger Arimaa community.
A strange possibility: bots could surpass humans, and their game could turn out drawish, while we still played decisive games.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
GeraldApplecore
Forum Newbie
Arimaa player #8279
Gender:
Posts: 4
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1051 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 2:16am » |
|
on Nov 30th, 2012, 10:51pm, hyperpape wrote:
[Havannah is] far eclipsed by the much younger Arimaa community. |
|
What a bizarre, outlandish claim 
Havannah is a better game than Arimaa. It's also scalable, less draw prone than Arimaa, and played with generic equipment. Statistically, Havannah is played at more than twice the rate of Arimaa at iggc. While you've been dancing on Havannah's grave, Havannah has been out kicking butt and taking names. Havannah has been thoroughly analyzed longer than Arimaa has been in existence.
Havannah is a far cry from far eclipsed by the likes of Arimaa. Check your far fetched facts, Pape. Havannah has a much brighter future than Arimaa could ever hope for.
Incidentally, Cephalopod is played at more than twice the rate of Havannah at Spanish megasite, Ludoteka. So by extension, Cephalopod doodies on Arimaa.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
christianF
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4019
Gender:
Posts: 804
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1052 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 6:15am » |
|
on Nov 30th, 2012, 10:51pm, hyperpape wrote:| And the real key to my point of view is that the analysis that's been done of Havannah is so limited. It's far eclipsed by the much younger Arimaa community. |
|
Omar and I are different people. I basically try to bring a new game to the community's attention and leave it at that. Sometimes you can't leave it at that, but most of the time you can. Then I wait for the next game.
Omar has basically Arimaa to concentrate on, and has other interests and talents that allowed him to spark a blooming community and an effective marketing strategy. Mind you, he never could have done that if Arimaa had been a bad game. But it is also an arbitrary game. This it has in common with chess variants. As a designer I tend to shy away from the arbitrary. The chess variants I made all revolve around a new idea or concept within the general idea of checkmate. Like, how much does one actually need to create a chess variant. That led to Chad. But such a result in itself is arbitrary, because later I accidentally (and ironically) stumbled over Shakti. It's a troublesome design area and Omar was lucky to have it all come together so well. But how well Arimaa will hold up in the future is anybody's guess. Success always lends a hand to digging its own grave.
on Nov 30th, 2012, 10:51pm, hyperpape wrote:| A strange possibility: bots could surpass humans, and their game could turn out drawish, while we still played decisive games. |
|
That's actually the most likely scenario for most games that can end in a draw. But there's always the matter of margins. Havannah has a smaller margin of draws than most other such games. And when Havannah dies, eventually, it will be no different than its inventor (long ago by then), or any inventor, or indeed any game.
So it's a bit of an effort to really care  .
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
christianF
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4019
Gender:
Posts: 804
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1053 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 6:44am » |
|
Today, december 1, the seventh test round of the CodeCup Challenge 2013 will be played. As I write, it is running, and already new contenders can be found at the top. I've played some 70 Symple games now, against various human and AI opponents, and I can sort of keep up with the front of the pack. I'll comment on the final ranking later.
Edit:
Eventually the strongest known programs came out on top. B_ot (aka 'Engine') by Bertrand Lunderer (blunderer, a nick) lost 2 of 4 against Remco Bloemen and 4 of 4 against Abdessamad ELKASIMI. The latter two made 2-2 too. These are the top dogs. I won once and lost twice against Abdessamad in the CodeCup settings, that is: base-15, penalty-6.
Here are my current two games against the winner B_ot (game 1 - game 2) and I'm winning both, but these are base-19 penalty-10 games with bigger trees and more emphasis on connectivity (because of the higher penalty).
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 9:30am by christianF » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hyperpape
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7113
Gender:
Posts: 80
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1054 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 10:21am » |
|
Mark, it may be confusing to hear this, but I'm not interested in pissing matches about which game is more popular (which y'all claim not to care about, but constantly argue about), or better.
My claim was about the amount of _analysis_ that a game has been subjected to. And on that front, Arimaa is ahead. I'm not sure how the number of games of Arimaa compare to Havannah (there are some 250000 games of Arimaa played on the arimaa website, but I don't know a good count for all the places Havannah is played). But the point is that there are two books on Arimaa, there are problem compendiums, there is collaborative analysis that occurs on the boards, or in game commentaries. Meanwhile, in Havannah, there are some cursory strategic notices from Christian Freeling, but there is almost no public discussion of strategy, opening sequences, problem sets, any of the things we associate with analysis in Chess, Checkers, Go, or other games like that. People study (or don't) in isolation.
And of course none of these games compares to Checkers/Draughters--we know more about perfect play in those games than in any of Arimaa, Havannah, Slither, Cephalopod. That's not because Checkers is best, but just because of its history. In fact, knowing so much about play in Draughts is almost a bad thing--it's why we know it's so drawish.
So my point is this: there is more analysis of Arimaa than Havannah, but still nothing for Arimaa comparable to what exists for Chess, Checkers or Go. And that collaborative analysis opens up new ways of play.
So it could turn out that if Havannah was subjected to the same level of scrutiny as other games, it could become drawish (though there is no positive reason to believe that will happen).
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 10:35am by hyperpape » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hyperpape
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7113
Gender:
Posts: 80
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1055 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 10:32am » |
|
on Dec 1st, 2012, 6:15am, christianF wrote:| But it is also an arbitrary game. This it has in common with chess variants. As a designer I tend to shy away from the arbitrary. |
|
That's fine for you. It seems like an interesting idea to try and create non-arbitrary structures subject to the constraints that you adopt, or Mark adopts, or Nick adopts, though it's not a pursuit I care to engage in, or feel that it has much bearing on me as a game player. My positive evaluation of Havannah, Slither, Oust*, Redstone* and Arimaa is based entirely on how they play.
(*) Conjectured. I've watched games, but never played them. They seem appealing.
Quote:| So it's a bit of an effort to really care . |
|
I agree. I am not worried by the thought that Havannah may be drawish. I just hope you can admit we know a lot less about this than you sometimes suggest. What we know is that right now, Havannah is amazingly resistant to draws, given that they are possible.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 10:32am by hyperpape » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
GeraldApplecore
Forum Newbie
Arimaa player #8279
Gender:
Posts: 4
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1056 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 11:09am » |
|
on Dec 1st, 2012, 10:21am, hyperpape wrote:
250000 games of Arimaa played on the arimaa website |
|
Oh get real. The vast majority of those are barely started test games against a bot. The number of completed, person to person games is obviously a teensy weensy fraction of that. Stop trying to mislead everyone with Arimaa's phony popularity.
on Dec 1st, 2012, 10:21am, hyperpape wrote:
But the point is that there are two books on Arimaa, there are problem compendiums, there is collaborative analysis that occurs on the boards, or in game commentaries. Meanwhile, in Havannah, there are some cursory strategic notices from Christian Freeling, |
|
Boy that's a lot of piss for someone who doesn't like pissing contests. Arimaa is a good game by all accounts. But it's also commercially produced and heavily promoted by Omar. Arimaa's untold "success" is mainly a product of Omar's money, charisma, and dedication. Arimaa uses proprietary equipment, and will only be produced for a limited time. Online, there are simply better games to choose from than Arimaa.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 11:25am by christianF » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
christianF
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4019
Gender:
Posts: 804
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1057 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 11:47am » |
|
on Dec 1st, 2012, 10:32am, hyperpape wrote:| I agree. I am not worried by the thought that Havannah may be drawish. I just hope you can admit we know a lot less about this than you sometimes suggest. What we know is that right now, Havannah is amazingly resistant to draws, given that they are possible. |
|
I'm perfectly willing to admit that. If I suggest otherwise, sometimes, that's because Havannah's margin of draws is very small compared to other games, and because Havannah will probably never be big enough to get the global pack of top programmers out for the hunt, or to sprout top players for that matter. I hope we don't forget that most games are played recreationally, even if they make it to the occasional club or association. Chess, Go and Shogi are big game because they're big games.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 11:49am by christianF » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hyperpape
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7113
Gender:
Posts: 80
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1058 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 12:08pm » |
|
Mark, you are welcome to reread my posts to confirm that I am neither making claims about popularity, nor pissing on anything.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
GeraldApplecore
Forum Newbie
Arimaa player #8279
Gender:
Posts: 4
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1059 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 12:26pm » |
|
CHRISTIAN, LICK YOUR DIARRHEA CRUST OFF ED'S SAGGING BALLS
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
christianF
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4019
Gender:
Posts: 804
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1060 on: Dec 1st, 2012, 12:51pm » |
|
Quote:Symple's balance is still a concern though. Why did Christian gradually change the parameter from at least 2 to at least 4 to at least 6? It has to be a balance issue. As skill levels slowly increase, so must the minimum value of the parameter. What else could be the reason for increasing it? Is it too tactical at the smaller parameter values? Too opaque? Those aren't reasons to strictly rule out the smaller parameters. It has to be an ongoing balance issue.
I actually want to play Symple a few times, admittedly to see how bad it is.
November 19, 2012 |
|
Mark Steere had been bashing around on Symple for almost two years, and for a long time in this very thread, when he posted this. It shows that he had no clue about the penalty parameter. Luis had to put him straight:
Quote:| As far as I know, the suggested penalty parameter hasn't changed because of a lack of balance, but simply because higher penalty values provide for increased drama and more interesting strategic dilemmas. |
|
Being clueless regarding the parameter means being clueless regarding the move protocol, the balancing rule, the object, the 'oneness' of the game.
So all this bashing that one can find in this very thread, till the moment he was banned, was given in complete 'cluelessness'. Imagine that.
Omar gave me the means to keep this thread on track. That means that discussions should be content centered, not ego centered. Not that I'm fully armored against ego, but I'm an old hippie. "Its nice to be important, but its more important to be nice" isn't that bad a motto to live by.
P.S. I'll copy the preceding one to justify the removal of some posts:
on Dec 1st, 2012, 12:26pm, GeraldApplecore wrote:| CHRISTIAN, LICK YOUR DIARRHEA CRUST OFF ED'S SAGGING BALLS |
|
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 1st, 2012, 1:13pm by christianF » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
christianF
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4019
Gender:
Posts: 804
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1061 on: Dec 2nd, 2012, 1:15pm » |
|
I'm an old fox and I wasn't hunting or anything, but while discussing Symple Hex (no applet yet) with Benedikt, I picked up a faint presence of a game. Ignoring it would have been harder than following the trail, so I followed a trail that led to a new move protocol which in turn pointed to 'territory' as the most likely object, and on thursday night, in the magic span between going to bed and falling asleep, it came together without a wrinkle.
It's called Triccs and there's also a square version that I'm not quite sure about because of the usual straight/diagonal issues.
I'm sticking my neck out here, because I've not played it yet, but I have a fairly good feeling about it. An applet is high on the priority list.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
browni3141
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7014
Gender:
Posts: 384
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1062 on: Dec 2nd, 2012, 9:00pm » |
|
on Dec 1st, 2012, 2:16am, GeraldApplecore wrote:
What a bizarre, outlandish claim
Havannah is a better game than Arimaa. It's also scalable, less draw prone than Arimaa, and played with generic equipment. Statistically, Havannah is played at more than twice the rate of Arimaa at iggc. While you've been dancing on Havannah's grave, Havannah has been out kicking butt and taking names. Havannah has been thoroughly analyzed longer than Arimaa has been in existence.
Havannah is a far cry from far eclipsed by the likes of Arimaa. Check your far fetched facts, Pape. Havannah has a much brighter future than Arimaa could ever hope for.
Incidentally, Cephalopod is played at more than twice the rate of Havannah at Spanish megasite, Ludoteka. So by extension, Cephalopod doodies on Arimaa. |
|
Interesting that a game without possibility for draws is more draw prone than a game with possibility for draws.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
jackspritz
Forum Newbie
Arimaa player #4584
Gender:
Posts: 5
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1063 on: Dec 3rd, 2012, 4:03am » |
|
Corey Clark here. I guess I had to join the fray sooner or later.
on Nov 28th, 2012, 6:07am, christianF wrote:| As long as one gets there, the route isn't all that important, and I do understand self-chosen restrictions (and even see the advantages). I fail to understand however why games outside the realm to which the Church restricts itself, should be left unconsidered altogether. |
|
First off, I want to say that personally I do not envision a future where only draw-free abstracts exist. My belief is simply that abstract game design is a recreational science, not an art. I believe there are rules to designing abstract games and I believe what constitutes a good game is fundamentally objective. What I would like to see an end to is the unsophisticated "guess and check" approach and creative freewheeling that currently reigns. I say enough designs based on the fact you saw some birds flying around (I'm looking at you Dieter). This is mathematics. As a designer I seek the approval of the universe before any prospective audience.
Recently I was having a conversation with an iggamecenter user and there I came up with a perfect term to describe the current abstract game design climate. That term is "draw apologetics". What do I mean by this? Well a common criticism of my perspective on draws is that some people like them. Obviously I can't argue with this other than to say I don't care (I really don't). However I'll admit Nick Bentley made a very good point when he said something to the effect of "the most balanced game would have 1 perfect draw". Though to my mind, this does not justify the existence of any and all draws. far from it. And yet these are just the sort of draws being justified. What I term "Draw apologetics" is the process by which a designer builds a game, discovers draws during playtests or otherwise conceives of a draw position and evaluates its likelihood based on a gut feeling or a limited sample. None of this inspires me with confidence. If it isn't demonstrable that your game is at least practically draw free then by what method are you determining the likelihood of a draw? And of course as the designer you are already biased when making this assessment. Personally I would abandon "cyclophobia" altogether if it didn't seem to be such an intuitive and sensible approach. But indeed as I agree with Nick that draws have the potential to be a signifier of balance in a game, I dream of the day when we will have sophisticated enough of an understanding of how perfect information games work that we begin to design the right kind of draws into our games to enhance them. Most draws however simply attract the branches of the game tree into a convergence and bind them at once. If both players are ultimately pursuing their own ends then once the method for creating a draw has been discovered draws will only become more frequent. A good draw would be one that is so rare and inconsistent with intuitive play that the theory would already be highly counter-intuitive for it to ever be relevant. Such a position may exist in Ayu for instance. So no, I have no problem with draws and cycles on principle so long as their exact nature can be determined.
Christian I will also say its telling that you remain by far the most vociferous critic of the "church" and yet you continually praise the games that filter out. Namely Ketchup, Slither, Hex Oust and Ayu. You also called Luis the best designer working today like a week ago. This apparent contradiction doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You seem to imply the methods of the church are wrong and yet the games produced by this method are brilliant. I have bandied about a few theories in casual chats as to why you do this but I'll reserve them for the time being as I'll admit they're fairly far-fetched. At any rate I'm calling you out here.
on Nov 28th, 2012, 6:07am, christianF wrote:| Rampart shows that CC is still a dedicated follower of the Church. It's the kind of game you might design if you contemplate Tanbo long enough. Like two years. |
|
Actually Rampart was the product of contemplating Tanbo for about 20 minutes. I consider use of the Tanbo mechanic to be a compromise at best. My design grail over these past two years had been a game which would conserve as much board space as possible. This was something I became deeply interested in after falling in love with Hex Oust. Originally I had hoped to find my own finitude mechanism but Oust and Tanbo were always lurking on the periphery. Unfortunately the ones I did come up with had various problems, either not being able to produce a filled board or were too high maintenance or too difficult to build a game around. However Ki did filter out of earlier experiments. So back in August I was fiddling around with the Tanbo concept in the sandbox and eventually Rampart just started coming together and there was obviously no turning back. First off I needed to create some sort of conflict so I decided "what if you could occupy your own liberties" and this created a very tense environment for the game. To me this is really what makes Rampart an essential game. Its obviously very cold because every move is a possible liability. Yet one would have to wonder what passive play looks like in Rampart, clinging to the edge will get you nowhere and failure to defend your groups from an aggressive opponent will result in some serious losses. Rampart has another novel mechanic which enhances its potential for drama, the "ghost capture". By having the removal of enemy stones constitute a whole move the tempo is always shifting. Really Christian I don't know how this eluded you so thoroughly that you just wrote the game off as a Tanbo variant. I guess that intuition isn't what it used to be...
Rampart really wasn't 2 years in the making, it came together in less than an hour but the process was all the failed designs that preceded it and how I developed a better sense for negative feedback mechanisms and gaining a better understanding of the design process along the way. That's really how it is with abstract game design I think. You're not going to be working on one game for years or even months but the previous failures are all part of the process leading up to the conception of that one exceptional game.
|
| « Last Edit: Dec 3rd, 2012, 4:20am by jackspritz » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
hyperpape
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #7113
Gender:
Posts: 80
|
|
Re: Essay by Christian Freeling on inventing games
« Reply #1064 on: Dec 3rd, 2012, 7:55am » |
|
Browni two things worth knowing:
1) the draw prevention mechanisms of Arimaa were added relatively late in the design process, and that makes folks like Christian and Mark dislike them.
2) For some people, explicitly preventing cycles (superko, the threefold repetition rule) is inelegant or a cheat. Any game can be made cycle free using those methods, so it doesn't count to them (I'm not sure if I'm speaking for Christian here, but I know that Mark thinks this way).
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print