Detectives
C14
J16
Fugitive
1 Like
I considered also playing another stone to threaten N16, but I’m concerned about committing too much to an area that is already blown. If the hunt in that area cools a bit, I might go back to that area, but I feel that I need to hedge a bit and get started on developing something in the bottom left.
As others noted, it’s quite difficult for the fugitive to face three stones per turn from the detectives. When they locate my stones, they can completely rip apart my position. I think the only possibility to winning is if I can pull off a lot of building in one area, while the detectives are distracted elsewhere.
Eventually, they will discover the top right or bottom left developments, and hopefully not both simultaneously. The best I can do is to remain flexible (with some stones set up in each), such that can pivot to other while they focus on the discovery.
2 Likes
Exciting!
It’s starting to look promising in the lower left, but I still think the detectives are hugely favored to win from this position. Even if they don’t discover the lower left situation until 4 moves from now, they could then focus their efforts and easily kill.
And I don’t see a better option for the fugitive than to continue taking liberties and hope for blue to somehow forget about the lower left entirely 
Actually, assuming that red gets 5 move in a row in the lower left now, capturing the blue chains, red still isn’t alive right? A4 or D1 could be captured, for instance.
I think some sort of black magic will be required from @yebellz to win this 
4 Likes
One weird idea for how to “buff” the fugitive: allow them to “cheat” by retroactively changing their previous moves, as long as the revealed information stays consistent.
For instance, at this moment in the current game, @yebellz may think that B17, J14, L15 and P15 would be better placed in the lower left, and from the detectives perspective, they might as well have been. F16 however must be left where it is, because the detectives can deduce its existence even though it’s not visible.
Playing against a fugitive like this can be thought of as playing against an incredibly “lucky” opponent, who always just so happens to have played their stones where they later turned out to be the most useful. The detectives can also think of the board as being in a superposition of many possible states, and every move they make is collapsing some part of the wave function (with the fugitive getting to choose which set of possible states the game collapses to). I hope I’m not butchering these terms too bad, I’m not a physicist
Somewhat counterintuitively, this removes any hidden information and luck from the game, meaning that there is well-defined perfect play. In other words, on a particular board, against a particular number of detectives, it’s either possible or impossible for the fugitive to live (in contrast to the hidden information version currently being played, where the outcome may be dependent on luck).
Not sure if this variant would be any fun to play, but it’s an interesting thought experiment!
4 Likes
I wrote a “cheating” hangman game with a similar idea a while ago. It’s devilishly hard.
my hangman program literally giving me a whupping
________ (used: )
Your guess? e
________ (used: e)
Your guess? a
________ (used: ae)
Your guess? i
_____i__ (used: aei)
Your guess? o
_____i__ (used: aeio)
Your guess? u
__u__i__ (used: aeiou)
Your guess? n
__u__in_ (used: aeinou)
Your guess? s
__u__in_ (used: aeinosu)
Your guess? k
__u__in_ (used: aeiknosu)
Your guess? t
__u__in_ (used: aeiknostu)
Your guess? m
__u__in_ (used: aeikmnostu)
Your guess? y
__u__in_ (used: aeikmnostuy)
Your guess? g
__u__ing (used: aegikmnostuy)
Your guess? r
__u__ing (used: aegikmnorstuy)
Your guess? v
__u__ing (used: aegikmnorstuvy)
Your guess? f
__u__ing (used: aefgikmnorstuvy)
Your guess? b
__u__ing (used: abefgikmnorstuvy)
Your guess? c
__u__ing (used: abcefgikmnorstuvy)
Your guess? d
__u__ing (used: abcdefgikmnorstuvy)
Your guess? l
__u__ing (used: abcdefgiklmnorstuvy)
Your guess? p
__upping (used: abcdefgiklmnoprstuvy)
Your guess? h
_hupping (used: abcdefghiklmnoprstuvy)
Your guess? w
whupping - you got it!
3 Likes
Is this even alive?
Suppose detectives answer like this:
3 Likes
Exactly! I believe the detectives would be able to kill quite easily from such a position.
1 Like
Maybe there even exists a polynomial time solution that could be easily achieved by a nondeterministic fugitive machine. It remains an open question as to whether a deterministic fugitive machine can achieve something similar…
1 Like
I guess, maybe I need to build something like this first, before tipping my hand with a capture:
Just 8 more stones! 
4 Likes
Best-case scenario: Detectives discover and capture D4 and then leave that corner alone, leaving the fugitive to capture in six moves (or more).
3 Likes
Detectives
D5
E4
Fugitive
True State
Visible Board
Notes
I think I should probably resign soon. My last long shot hope is to try to encircle the center (on a large scale) and try to disrupt some stones there, but I’m doubtful that has a realistic shot of working. I’ll give it another turn, just to mull it over, but I won’t pointlessly drag out this game too much longer.
What do you all think?
Should I resign?
- Yes
- No
- Maybe
0
voters
2 Likes
I checked “no” since my intuition says there’s still hope, but I haven’t thought about it very hard.
If I were playing I might try something like alternating distraction moves in the lower-left with trying to build something secret in the middle-right, or even going back to the middle-top again.
1 Like
I don’t think there’s any hope left, but it could still be interesting to see how the detectives handle the next few moves.
Do what feels best for you 
3 Likes
If detectives capture two stones and fill d4, the board can still look like this in seven moves.
The fugitive isn’t alive, but if fugie can squeeze in another move or two while detectives investigate other areas, then life may be possible.
3 Likes
