Re: MaxCheckers -- Request by the Author for Input

[John Williams <williams@morinda.com>]

In that situation, checkers are being captured, and you have a very finite
supply (unlike go).  So the situation will correct itself.

I would suggest sticking with traditional checkers rules for draws: fifty
moves without a capture, etc.

~ John Williams


On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Richard Rognlie wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from Stan_Druben@webtv.net -----
> 
> From: Stan_Druben@webtv.net
> Subject: Your thoughts welcomed!
> 
> Dear Players of MaxCheckers,
> 
> When I invented Checkers to the Max (TM), Go was one of the
> inspirations.  Therefore, I was aware that ko-like situations could
> arise in the game; for example:
> 
>      Imagine a black checker at C5 and a white checker at E7.  (I'm
> assuming A1 is black's left corner.)  White enters a checker at D6.
> Black responds with an entry to A3.  White must now jump C6, followed by
> black having to jump B4.  If white re-enters at D6, the preceding
> sequence would be available for repeating.
> 
> My decision was to permit such a series of moves, so I did not include a
> ko rule.  (A ko rule would prohibit the re-entry at D6 until one white
> move elsewhere on the board.)
> 
> What has been your experience with ko-like situations?  Do you feel they
> should be prohibited?  Permitted?  Should there simply be an agreement
> between the players before a game to apply or not apply a ko rule?
> Would adding this as an option in "MaxCheckers" be useful?
> 
> Also, I welcome your comments on Checkers to the Max (TM)--challenging;
> an improvement on standard checkers; "six of one, half a dozen of the
> other" compared to the Anglo-American game . . . ?  Please write me at
> Stan_Druben@webtv.net.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Stan
> 
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net with
> 	unsubscribe pbmserv-users
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>