[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [pbmserv] ninuki confusion

At 04:18 AM 10/8/09, you wrote: 
I agree that the rules are confusing. Here is an updated link:
http://www.renju.net/study/rifrules.php

And another page which may be more helpful
http://www.renju.net/study/rules.php

Here is the definition of a three:
A row with three stones to which you, without at the same time a five in a
row is made, can add one more stone to attain a straight four.

Very helpful. I believe I had seen that somehow somewhere before, but I may have glossed over too quickly with regard to ninuki (which I had been challenged to at the time) because I didn't think it was the same game. I probably did not have the experience to fully understand it anyway at first.

Now I understand that many of those definitions still apply. I am also concluding that ninuki is a variant for advanced players that gives equal restrictions to both players for the most part. The renju rules you point me to suggest that typically only the first player has restrictions against 3-3, etc., for example.

But this is not part of the ninuki variant on gamerz. Both players have the same limitations apparently. I suppose that might be interesting to... uh, those interested in that. ;) Someone explained to me that the 3-3 is crucial to these game types, so perhaps limiting it might create something valuable for advanced players.

I assume there is some debate about which of these Renju/Pente style n in a row rules sets are the best.


The move 31 N14 is not a double three, it is a four-three which is allowed.
A line is a three if it has three and only three stones.

Well, that explains it then.


Renju is an enjoyable game but it does take some study and practice to
understand the rules.

Fair enough. So noted.