Chess is more complex than Canadian Checkers

>chess is more complex than Canadian Checkers

Do people seriously believe this?

Don't mess with chessfags. They are all autistic. We should pity them instead. Just let them have their little game and just let them pretend that memorizing moves makes them smart. They are not hurting anyone and it is really mean to make fun of autists.

>Don't mess with chessfags.
Will they reeee if I mention I only like Blitz chess?

What the fuck is Canadian checkers? Is that like Chinese checkers

It's another name for draughts 12x12

>bigger board
>more tree branches...

gee what a fucking surprise

the fuck is draughts?

No one gives a shit anymore. Chess is solved, Go is pretty much solved, now only game people actually care about is Starcraft. Starcraft is way more complex because it's partially observable and continuous.

You're a moron.

>chess

t. smugmug

>connect 4
kek

Go is only more complex because it's played on a much bigger board.

Checkers on a 18x18 is far more complex than 19x19 Go.

NOT possible. It's about the way the pieces move, more possibilities in Go. Would explain but you wouldn't understand and it's just an anime board anyway.

14x14 checkers aleady has a higher game-tree complexity than 19x19 Go.

>would explain
But you simply can't.
Go has a higher state-space complexity because there are more legal positions, but the game-tree complexity of 18x18 checkers compared to 19x19 Go is far bigger.

If there are more legal positions in Go how is it possible to not be more complex than a chess board of the same size?
No, just no.

Checkers

Checkers, not chess.

Because there are a greater possible amount of games that can be played, therefore the game-tree complexity (the branching factor) would be far bigger despite there being less legal positions.
It's ok to not understand it, but don't claim shit if you don't.

Maybe try to think how those games are played.
Checkers on a 18x18 would have a far greater game-tree complexity than 19x19 Go.

You're the one claiming shit and it's sad. If you have more options you have more things to think about. More complex. Easy-peasy. I can't believe I have to explain this to a drumph tard like you. Just stop posting here.

Not the guy you're responding to. But if I'm understanding this correctly, the game tree is larger for Checkers than Go because of the number of turns to win either game? Like, there's more different moves you can do per-turn in Go, but with Checkers there's just more turns?

>but with Checkers there's just more turns
Basically.

With a 14x14 or 16x16 checkers board you have to think a lot further into the future than with Go.
The game-tree complexity is much higher.

connect-4,000 would be more complex than all of those

He's right though, from an AI perspective.

So with go they only count games up to 361 moves (each player has played every stone in their bowl), whereas in checkers... when is a game declared as a stalemate or a draw?

Sort of like the 50 moves rule for chess.
Somebody should always be able to win in checkers/draughts but we don't have time for every possible win.

>Chess is solved
It isn't though.

>no shogi

I'm guessing it would be right above 13x13 go in that graph.

Slightly lower state-space complexity but a much higher game-tree complexity than 13x13 Go.

Having more possible moves doesn't make a game more complex or strategically interesting. Just look at any given 3D game. There are a near infinite amount of ways to move your character in 3D space, but that doesn't necessarily make them deep or interesting games.

chess is not solved, you're bullshitting

I wonder if the chess variant called 3-check will be solved in my life time. It's pretty much a simplified version of chess with ton of forcing lines right from the opening.

>near infinite
No such thing. Either something is finite or infinite.

Let X>1 be a number that is "near infinite". Let Y = X^10000. Now, Y must be "near infinite" as well. But Y is so much larger than X that it wouldn't make sense to call X "near infinite".

I personally prefer the up-to-date, real-time version of chess.

Really? You can't end up with a situation where you just have a red and a black king chasing each other? Or is that a draw?