3 ms·
> I would not have guessed that human strategy was that deficient. With as much freedom as Go allows I think it would be surprising if humans had stumbled upon
by jonknee 10y ago
> I would not have guessed that human strategy was that deficient.
With as much freedom as Go allows I think it would be surprising if humans had stumbled upon an optimal strategy (or Master for that matter, I'm sure there is still much to be improved!).
- thefalcon 10y agoThe fact that Go commentators talk in terms of local strategy and narrative and anything other than the end-game from the very beginning made me feel fairly confident that Go was not a game that humans would ever reach optimal strategy levels at.
- Florin_Andrei 10y agoYou only need to do the math and look at the huge exponent to figure out that this is indeed the case.
- cLeEOGPw 10y agoAnd in addition to that, winning condition is also extremely fuzzy. Looking at the Master games, I couldn't tell why he is wining at all, granted I don't know much about Go. So if it requires some experience just to recognize a winner, and as far as I know sometimes even professionals can't tell for sure who is wining, it's pretty safe to say Go game is just too complex of a game for humans to come to optimal strategies in any reasonable amount of time.