arXiv:2009.04374cs.AI
Assessing Game Balance with AlphaZero: Exploring Alternative Rule Sets in Chess
Abstract
It is non-trivial to design engaging and balanced sets of game rules. Modern chess has evolved over centuries, but without a similar recourse to history, the consequences of rule changes to game dynamics are difficult to predict. AlphaZero provides an alternative in silico means of game balance assessment. It is a system that can learn near-optimal strategies for any rule set from scratch, without any human supervision, by continually learning from its own experience. In this study we use AlphaZero to creatively explore and design new chess variants. There is growing interest in chess variants like Fischer Random Chess, because of classical chess's voluminous opening theory, the high percentage of draws in professional play, and the non-negligible number of games that end while both players are still in their home preparation. We compare nine other variants that involve atomic changes to the rules of chess. The changes allow for novel strategic and tactical patterns to emerge, while keeping the games close to the original. By learning near-optimal strategies for each variant with AlphaZero, we determine what games between strong human players might look like if these variants were adopted. Qualitatively, several variants are very dynamic. An analytic comparison show that pieces are valued differently between variants, and that some variants are more decisive than classical chess. Our findings demonstrate the rich possibilities that lie beyond the rules of modern chess.
Thanks for bringing up the Chinese chess example! Btw, see https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf for an investigation. > Now stalemate by repeated back-and-forth is a different matter. I would favor some variant of Go's Ko rule, which is that you may not make a move if the result…
eruView on HNParent context
When people complain about chess being uninteresting, they usually complain about too many draws. Adding more opportunities to turn draws into wins/losses might seem like a good thing? > Now the middle game is less interesting, because taking any kind of risk is never worth it.…
eruView on HNParent context
Yes, you are right that this is only an intellectual exercise. (Btw, it's quite popular in the Go world to reformulate the ancient clunky rules of Go into a more modern, mathematical version that might or might not have small differences in gameplay.) However, I don't actually…
eruView on HNParent context
The important thing to mention: in many respects, you can pretend that in chess the objective is to capture the opposing king. But for historical reasons, the game actually tops one move before, and the king is never captured. But they also have weird rules that both (A) forbid…
eruView on HNParent context
According to the paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.04374.pdf) removing the special handling of stalemates did not really change the draw ratio much. So the weaker party can still gun for the draw in most situations. (However, they had really good computers play, who do not get…
eruView on HNParent context