3 ms·
I said “deep”. The whole “technically this is part of a Turing machine” argument does not mean you need to think about such things at all. Leveraging the potent
by oneoff786 4y ago
I said “deep”. The whole “technically this is part of a Turing machine” argument does not mean you need to think about such things at all. Leveraging the potential of a Turing machine is not going to help you win.
The average number of turns in an online game is less than 7 turns. I would further posit that if you constrained possible actions to decisions that good players are likely to make, the game is no longer Turing complete.
- UncleMeat 4y agoObviously the setup is not practical in a real game. The point is a theoretical demonstration that the rules of MTG can be used to compute arbitrary functions, demonstrating that there can be no general computable strategy for all game states. This is similar to lots of CS results, where we might demonstrate that some problem is NP-Complete or undecidable or whatever even though in practice there are efficient algorithms that work for most instances of these problems.
- oneoff786 4y agoSure, but my point is that the computability of something is a poor measure of its complexity as a game of the non computable aspects are game theoretically always a dumb idea. You could make a similar claim about a game where any player can win at any time if they choose, but can alternatively do anything else. It’s not computable, but it is irrelevant to the complexity. You could probably also argue that a Turing intending player is still computable if playing against someone with a defined strategy. Because they will be halted by the other player winning.