It’s good advice for any Diplomacy-like game. Another trick which I haven’t been using as much as I should, is always referring to players by their colors in the game, to help separate the players from the colors they’re playing.
I hope to one day earn your trust Red, so you need not worry about such fantasies anymore. Lets work together at securing space for us and our allies first, and share it later.
So the obvious next move for me is probably F8, to try keep my stones connected. If I do I don’t think I’m sketching out any real “area” and if the game stays peaceful I’ll need “area” to play in since I can’t pass.
If I don’t play f8, certainly B8 looks nice, maybe that collection of stones with peaceful play could survive on the side for a while by itself, and maybe the other stone runs a bit and becomes a stick with a handful of liberties.
If I let someone play F8, I’m probably separated, and the lone stone, can probably only run so far and is surrounded. There’s probably a very definite timer on the number of moves I can survive without some help, and there’s not much else to do. I can probably only run into four-ish other players who could capture it whenever they feel like.
With that being said, it could be time to cause a stir and jump into some mildy open area of the board.
Feel free to dissuade me from choosing, or alternatively encourage me to choose any of the following moves marked with White/Orange stripes
I’m sorry, I should’ve perhaps stated this somewhere, but my responses are made as part of the game we are playing.
I don’t think Samraku is in any way a liar outside of the game, and I wish to expressly state that I appreciate the way Samraku is playing the game. There’s several strategies to play this, and deceit is without a doubt a very valuable tool in a game like this. In a way, I admire the move Samraku made, and I can imagine myself making a similar move if the roles were reversed and I felt like it was a good strategy for me.
However, within the confines of the game, I personally see it as my strategy to point out that Samraku convinced me to play M11 with the (soft) promise to play in the corner, and then (sort of) broke this promise by playing on the side instead. It’s important that I make my stance on these kind of situations clear: I don’t appreciate them, and I think it makes Samraku (as a player in this game) very untrustworthy.
To translate my move: I’m trying to paint Samraku in bad light, hoping to convince more players to aid me, and hoping to weaken Samraku’s diplomatic position in the process.
I’m actually curious what would happen if Orange (or anyone for that matter) jumped into Azure and Rose’s area. Can it live? will it die? will it kill Rose and Azure and arise undisputed king of the South-East? who can tell, but I for one would love to find out.
You’re doing a great job so far
Perhaps we should enforce this, but I do like to use player names to make sure players receive a notification when talked about. I wouldn’t want someone missing a message about them.
I don’t think it’s necessary to make it a rule. It’s not like it costs anyone anything to use in-game monikers regardless of whether or not other people are using them, so there’s not an awkward situation where you feel you should do something, but would be at a disadvantage being the only one doing it. And you raise a good use case for using user names, so I’d rather just let both systems be acceptable and people will tend towards the one which is better.
I think it’s good that we keep the separation between in-game vs out-of-game behavior in mind. We have to put the game within a psychological sandbox, where we all suspend our normal expectations of interpersonal behavior and view this as an exercise of creative role play.
We can use colors or other monikers to refer to each, but maybe we should discuss those, just so there is no confusion about the names of the colors.
I’ll call myself as Sky (short for “sky blue”), and it seems that @Samraku prefers Azure and has used Rose to refer to @Auri’s stones. Are the remaining colors simply “Red”, “Yellow”, “Green”, and “Orange”, or do people prefer more fanciful names? Like “Crimson”, “Gold”, “Emerald”, and “Tangerine”?
On the other hand, it is quite handy to use the “@” tags, which conveniently autocomplete and notify the user of the mention.
Unlike regular Go, it might be a bit easier to make life (when invading one opponent’s area), since it is sufficient to make just one large eye (e.g., a single two-point eye makes a group that cannot be killed, without sacrificing a stone). However, when invading into an area that holds the interests of two opponents, it seems much trickier to live, since one would have to deal with two moves against one.
Probably a combination of both is useful in many ways.
I might like to say hey @yebellz, B9 might still seem a bit too aggressive toward sky’s territory/area, but it is a good move for me. Orange has few options, and a somewhat bleak outlook in the long game hence should try to expand as much as possible, or try to do something active, like diving into other areas possibly dominated by Azure, Rose, or similarly dominated by Blue, Yellow and Red.
It might ultimately lead to me placing last, but sometimes a risky strategy could play out better than an almost certain peaceful one.
There are some other ideas where one could try might local sekis with a teammate also I imagine. Like two players share liberties, where it would be suicidal to try and capture them, similar to the large eye space example.
I could imagine my stone at H8 getting surrounded, but maybe I could share two liberties with another player and it might make it hard to capture that stone without sacrifice for example.
Many possibilities once it becomes a fighting game
I think F8 is a fairly sensible next move for you, but if you choose not to, I promise not to attempt any cut with any moves around that area.
You might be able to delay playing around there, if other players give you similar reassurances.
I don’t like B9, but I think B8 is fine. My response would be to conservatively defend with B10.
I did not put much thought into the color names I used; just the first ones which seemed to describe the color in question in a way I did not think likely to cause confusion.
I might mention, just out of interest, that the turn order will probably become increasingly more important for me the longer we go on.
In particular it can be important for me, turn for turn, to try some agreement with say @yebellz, since they can immediately respond to any of my moves, exploit a weakness, rally support, in particular because of our proximity also. Equally we could be strong allies since we have consecutive moves
I understood Rose to mean Auri, but I think that color name might also be suggestive of Red.
To remove all confusion, we could use the hexadecimal color codes…
Glorious Tangerine Nation (@shinuito), I agree with everything you’ve just said. If you move at B8, I will move at B10. That leaves a buffer zone in between and controlled by us that I will happily divide equitably and amicably when it comes to the later filling-in stages, but I see no urgency in those small points there, when we have much more to gain elsewhere through cooperative growth.
I will go further to offer you assistance in case any other player aims to cut around F8. I stake the reputation of the Peaceful Sky Nation on such promises.
*The similarity of name with characters appearing in other games is purely a sign of artistic laziness and should not be conflated with this independent one.
I didn’t think of that; probably because I think of Rose as the proper (in the sense of proper noun) term for the color formed with equal parts magenta and red in subtractive color mixing.
May I recommend instead CIE L*a*b* values scaled such that the minimum and maximum values for each are -6 and 6 respectively?
Once one of your neighbours is eliminated, their area can become yours, of course…
F8 being open would make it my most reasonable move to play - so out of curiosity, what were to happen if I did so?