Nick Apperson wrote: > I considered making a version of go that plays with tetrahedral > geometry. It is a 3D arrangment where all nodes have 4 neighbors and > the angles between each are 109 degrees. Its connection properties > though are very different because of the way it it layed out. Hence, > I am going to have to disagree. But if what you mean is that all that > matters is the graph representation of the go board, I will agree with > you there. > > - Nick In 3D Go, you need a surface of stones to surround space but just a string of stones peeking in to ruin it. In normal 2D Go, you surround area by strings and ruin area by strings, so there is a nice balance. My guess is that Go in any other dimensionality than two would be dull. Playing on the surface of a ball, a torus, or a Klein bottle might be fun, though.
-- Tapani Raiko, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, +358 50 5225750 http://www.cis.hut.fi/praiko/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
