3 ms·
Hey, another question. In your write-up you mention enumerating the possibilities when no deduction is possible, and picking one of the lower ranked cells found
by svalorzen 9y ago
Hey, another question. In your write-up you mention enumerating the possibilities when no deduction is possible, and picking one of the lower ranked cells found like this. However, a couple of improvements come to mind.
First you could weight each possible configuration by the number of mines it contains per square vs the average remaining over the whole board (so a very mine heavy configuration is less likely if not many mines remain).
Another thing you mention is that once you find the counts per square, picking any one of the lower counted ones is the same. This doesn't look true for me. One would also want a click to reveal as much information as possible, so clicking in an area with low density of mines is better. In your example clicking into the middle right 2 next to the three ones would likely reveal more info than clicking on the top right 2.
Did you consider these as possible improvements?
- luckyt 9y agoIndeed, those are good ideas for improvements! It's hard to say whether they will improve the AI, as in both cases you're replacing one heuristic with another heuristic. You'd need to implement it and experiment with it -- and I haven't done so for my AI.