Derfel
Ronin Warlock
Did I Do That?
Troublemaker
Posts: 283
|
Post by Derfel on Sept 24, 2007 15:54:36 GMT -5
I was sitting in the computer lab at work today (I teach High School, so obviously I have time to kill)... and I came up with an idea that sort of freaked me out.
What if someone started compiling a database that held all of the moves a "Master" player had made?
So, say for example someone had played 1000+ games. I go to the archive, and input all of the situations and games that person had played in. With some simple calculations, therefore, I could have the probability of their "next move" available if I ever played that person again.
This is all theoretical, of course... but it was sort of a scary idea.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 24, 2007 17:49:18 GMT -5
A true master who had access to this data as well would know the probabilities of his own moves and also know that you know the probabilities of his moves. He would then use your supposed advantage against you.
So, I'm all for it.
|
|
|
Post by nawglan on Sept 24, 2007 17:52:05 GMT -5
i know there is some big holes (mid 30k through 51k), but the archive does have some very good games documented. lurch.homelinux.org/Can even narrow it down to games between specific warlocks.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 24, 2007 18:05:36 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I checked out your archive, nawglan. It's interesting to note that both Slartucker and I have lost a great majority of our games to the P/S opening. Probably a leak worth filling.
|
|
Derfel
Ronin Warlock
Did I Do That?
Troublemaker
Posts: 283
|
Post by Derfel on Sept 24, 2007 18:08:57 GMT -5
A true master who had access to this data as well would know the probabilities of his own moves and also know that you know the probabilities of his moves. He would then use your supposed advantage against you. So, I'm all for it. But then, one could play knowing that the "Master" knew about the probabilities, and therefore adjust accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 24, 2007 18:12:05 GMT -5
A true master who had access to this data as well would know the probabilities of his own moves and also know that you know the probabilities of his moves. He would then use your supposed advantage against you. So, I'm all for it. But then, one could play knowing that the "Master" knew about the probabilities, and therefore adjust accordingly. The reason they're masters is that they win 50/50s 90% of the time.
|
|
Derfel
Ronin Warlock
Did I Do That?
Troublemaker
Posts: 283
|
Post by Derfel on Sept 24, 2007 18:47:37 GMT -5
Ugh. What a horrible statement.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 24, 2007 19:06:53 GMT -5
Ugh. What a horrible statement. Not at all. You're talking about a way of evening out the disparity between a newer player and a great player. While I can't dispute the usefulness of a tool like that, it would only widen the gap. Any new data, in any game, always benefits the better player, since they are (necessarily) better at interpreting it. That is why in Warlocks, a game of perfect information, the great players nearly always get the best of any multiple-choice risk/reward (aka "50/50") situation no matter how much data each side has.
|
|
Derfel
Ronin Warlock
Did I Do That?
Troublemaker
Posts: 283
|
Post by Derfel on Sept 24, 2007 19:15:54 GMT -5
Who said anything about new players using it? Imagine the top 3 with that sort of resource at their disposal.
|
|
|
Post by Rycchus on Sept 24, 2007 19:22:19 GMT -5
I wouldn't categorise those sorts of things as 50-50s. Am I right in thinking you're including things like charm targets etc.? That's not a 50-50 because it's not a perfectly balanced situation. One outcome is higher risk than the other. There is a better play, and whilst the good players won't necessarily make that play 100% of the time, they will certainly make it a lot more than 50% of the time. These situations may seem like 50-50s to the new player, but only because he doesn't fully understand them.
Things like FFFoD situations I would call a "genuine 50-50" because it in the end does come down to chance. You can't possibly say that by game experience a great player has any better chance at a 50-50, just as you can't say that experienced coin tossers are more likely to get five tails in a row.
|
|
|
Post by Slartucker on Sept 24, 2007 23:42:42 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I checked out your archive, nawglan. It's interesting to note that both Slartucker and I have lost a great majority of our games to the P/S opening. Probably a leak worth filling. Unfortunately the archive's statistics on me are fairly misleading. It captured my first 200 or so games, the time period when I was a second-tier player at best. Back then Tchichi and Larry were insurmountable walls to me and I had no one to discuss strategy with. As soon as I began to focus and analyze and when Taliesin and I began collaborating, the archive shut down. It was down for the nearly 400 rated games I played with a much more astute understanding of the game, and by the time it started recording again I'd mostly stopped playing under Slartucker. The result is that it claims I rarely open S/W and usually open D/P or S/S (!), among other things that haven't been true of me for two and a half years.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 25, 2007 0:24:10 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I checked out your archive, nawglan. It's interesting to note that both Slartucker and I have lost a great majority of our games to the P/S opening. Probably a leak worth filling. Unfortunately the archive's statistics on me are fairly misleading. It captured my first 200 or so games, the time period when I was a second-tier player at best. Back then Tchichi and Larry were insurmountable walls to me and I had no one to discuss strategy with. As soon as I began to focus and analyze and when Taliesin and I began collaborating, the archive shut down. It was down for the nearly 400 rated games I played with a much more astute understanding of the game, and by the time it started recording again I'd mostly stopped playing under Slartucker. The result is that it claims I rarely open S/W and usually open D/P or S/S (!), among other things that haven't been true of me for two and a half years. Well sure, it's got a lot of my old scrubby games too, but I still find it interesting that S/P has been the best opening against me and not D/P as I would have thought. And Rycchus: I didn't say they are actual 50/50s. But they are still known by everyone as 50/50s because saying something is "50/50" is easier than saying it's a "multiple-choice risk vs reward scenario". However, between two players of equal skill playing a 75/25 or 60/40 or 99/1 situation repeatedly, each player will come out ahead 50% of the time. A master will come out ahead 80-90% of the time, or, more accurately, be in a situation that's twice as good when he does come out ahead.
|
|
|
Post by Rycchus on Sept 25, 2007 5:57:34 GMT -5
And Rycchus: I didn't say they are actual 50/50s. But they are still known by everyone as 50/50s ... Well not by me
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Sept 25, 2007 8:59:00 GMT -5
Who said anything about new players using it? Imagine the top 3 with that sort of resource at their disposal. Heh, or the top 2 players - doing the dopey dance for 50+ turns losing a point every 5th or so turn. Perfect info, perfect strategy, perfectly dopey. (no offense to ExDeath & Slartucker) DPPP/PSDD rounds, similar to space battles, can only happen with two willing opponents who agree to show up to the same party and repeatedly beat on each other with similar tactics.
|
|
|
Post by toyotami on Sept 25, 2007 8:59:17 GMT -5
Ooo Ooo Larry was me! ahhh the good old days when i had an alter ego. Now i just wander around not having any idea who anyone is. (Yes it took me til this tourney to know Spacca was Tchichi...though i prefer the name Tchichi, it is very Warlocky)
I have to say, i think i play a predictable way in certain situations. that information could be used against me and i am too lazy to find out where you people are getting it from.
|
|