This will come down to area scoring with a group tax, just like no-pass Go. Those with the least amount of area will be eliminated first.
Assuming all players cooperate during the game, and nobody gets into a fight, in the end all groups should end up being alive.
In fact, even in normal Go games, I enjoy watching players who win while being peaceful: stay alive, allow the opponent to live, in the end the player who was most efficient in building territory wins.
Anyways, I don’t understand how you think a non-aggression pact is a form of tyranny.
I believe it’s Martin’s move but I may as well ask ahead.
If I considered moves like e10 (like samraku) or one of b9, b8 or c8 would they come across as aggressive?
I don’t believe any of those pose a real threat. Maybe they draw a nice border for yebellz, and give me slightly stabler shape or more liberties in the case of c8 for one half of my stones.
Equally c6 could be a nice local move, but wherever I play it’ll be close to somebody
If I play normal ish go moves like d5, or h5 to sketch my own box, does anyone have a preference?
Anyway I can understand the idea that being peaceful until the end probably secures me and some others not in the corner low places. We’ll likely have less secure positions and not much room to play and so running out of liberties early.
I kind of knew that picking tengen anyway, so we’ll see how it plays out I’ll stay passive until someone has a good suggestion to improve my position. Acting first and on my own won’t help me, but likely neither will playing peacefully the entire game.
I’ve taken the time to read through the comments and … it’s already a crazy intense discussion Don’t forget that it’s a game though, no hard feelings everyone ~
I support the general notion of a non-aggression pact, and I will not attach to anybodies stones with the intention of eliminating them quickly with a surprise attack. I would like to participate for a while and am not looking to deprive anybody of their opportunity to play.
But I am unsure just exactly what duties I would agree to in case somebody breaks the pact.
My assumption would be that suppose I play a move (since I’m next) attaching to someone’s stone like d13, m13 or b4 or m3 etc. (Picking the clearly aggro ones )
Then I’m down to three liberties and three people accepting the pack could very easy eliminate me with their next moves
True the longer the game goes on, the more one might have to commit to such an attack.
Even if 6 players agreed to such a pact and one player just tried to cause trouble, which three might eliminate them, while three others get free territorial moves could be a source of conflict.
Attacking probably comes with a cost, but so too can waiting too long.
I would view E10 or other similar moves as unnecessarily aggressive. Such a stance indicates an ambition towards an already more dense area, and would seem to indicate an allegiance to the southern players.
There is considerably more space in the south, with only two players having any stones at all in the equator. I think that more balanced growth for everyone would be for you to seek expansion southward.
That’s a reasonable opinion. There’s only so far south I can reasonably go without it being classified as an invasion
I’m considering B7, it gives both @yebellz and @Civilian room for a kosumi to the second line without attaching, so you can peacefully expand your spaces if you choose.
Maybe I’ll get another move at like C6 or D6 for a bit of eyeshape later.
For the moment both B8 for @yebellz and C7 for @Civilian look like nice moves, although I would be in a much more disadvantageous position with both say on the board by next turn.
I’m repeating myself but I won’t take offence in you playing closer to me, ofcourse I would prefer if you wouldn’t, just like yebellz wants to have more space for himself. But this is a match of Go after all - so uhm go for it
I think I’ll prefer a conservative move, defending around D11. Thoughts?
E13 seems attractive, but perhaps a bit too greedy at this point. I think I need to leave some flexibility for @martin3141 to make a base as well. Rather than us fighting to split the pie between us, I think we need to look towards growing our collective pie.
Don’t forget that it’s a game though, no hard feelings everyone ~