[net.games] noughts and crosses

ma186aah@sdcc7.UUCP (dragon) (11/08/85)

i'm looking for a better description for
the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?

bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) (11/12/85)

> i'm looking for a better description for
> the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?

The game is played the way one plays "GO". The idea is to 
get 5 in a row, any angle.

bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) (11/12/85)

> i'm looking for a better description for
> the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?

Im sorry any angel means:    1 2 3 4 5  or 5 4 3 2 1 or

	   1                        1
	    2          or          2
	     3                    3
	      4                  4
	       5                5
 
	but not
 
              1    
	       2  5
		34

berry@tolerant.UUCP (David Berry) (11/14/85)

> The game is played the way one plays "GO". The idea is to 
> get 5 in a row, any angle.

	Well, at least partly correct.  The idea of "noughts and
crosses" is to get 5 in a row in any angle.  The idea of "go" is
considerably more complex.  Go is a game with relatively trivial rules,
but extremely complicated strategies which has a basic premise of
capturing as much territory as possible.  To the best of my knowledge
nobody has yet managed to write a program that plays a tolerable (much
less good!) game of go.  There is, however, another oriental game
(gomoku) that is played on a similar board with similar markers that is
similar to "noughts and crosses."

	BTW if anybody knows of a go program please let me know via
mail.
-- 

	David W. Berry
	...!ucbvax!tolerant!berry

	[standard disclaimer about this being only my opinion and not
	necessarily reflecting anything about Tolerant Systems.]

paulh@tektronix.UUCP (Paul Hoefling) (11/15/85)

In article <1988@bmcg.UUCP> bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) writes:
>> i'm looking for a better description for
>> the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?
>
>The game is played the way one plays "GO". The idea is to 
>get 5 in a row, any angle.

You know naught of what you speak.

First, GO is infinitely more complex than "getting 5 pieces in a row".
The 5 in a row game is Go-moku (or, I think, Pente).

Second, noughts and crosses is the British name for tic-tac-toe.
-- 

Paul Hoefling
Information Pack Rat
uucp: {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax,zehntel}!tektronix!paulh

billj@rocksvax.UUCP (Bill Jeffers) (11/18/85)

(munch)

 I played a game like that in florida called penta ? I seem to remember that
two pieces in a row were vulnerable to capture (by placing a piece at each end
similar to othello) but three were not and five won.


				Billj

mouse@mcgill-vision.UUCP (der Mouse) (11/21/85)

>In article <1988@bmcg.UUCP> bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) writes:
>>> i'm looking for a better description for
>>> the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?
>>The game is played the way one plays "GO". The idea is to 
>>get 5 in a row, any angle.
>You know naught of what you speak.
>First, GO is infinitely more complex than "getting 5 pieces in a row".
>The 5 in a row game is Go-moku (or, I think, Pente).
>Second, noughts and crosses is the British name for tic-tac-toe.
>Paul Hoefling
>Information Pack Rat
[Clearly a North American; see point 2 ;-]

(1) I read "...played the way one plays "GO""  to mean alternating black
and white moves on  a 19x19 board,  usually played on the  intersections
rather than  the squares,  not  meaning that  all the  rules of  go  are
borrowed.

(2) I found a boardgame book recently (don't have it here, sorry I can't
provide ISBN or exact title; mail me if you want me to dig it out) which
claims that "noughts and crosses" is the game of three-in-a-row on a 3x3
board, with players playing until the  board  is  full or  someone  wins
(North-American "tic-tac-toe"), while "tic-tac-toe" is actually another,
different, game (described below).  Must have  been a British book (:-);
North-American usage  (as I'm  sure everyone  on this side  of  the pond
knows) is that tic-tac-toe is  the same  thing as what  they (the  book)
call "noughts and crosses".

     Tic-tac-toe  as the  book has it is played  with three counters for
each player  on  a 3x3 board.  The  first six moves  are as in the other
game, each on any open square.  After these six moves, the counters move
as chess kings, trying to  make three-in-a-row.   Reminds me of a game I
enjoy; the  same thing  with eight men  on a  regular chessboard  (8x8),
trying  to make  5  in  a row.  As far as I know,  I invented this game,
though  it is  likely that  I found it  somewhere and  forgot about  the
original source.  (Can anyone confirm this with a published reference?)
-- 
					der Mouse

USA: {ihnp4,decvax,akgua,etc}!utcsri!mcgill-vision!mouse
     philabs!micomvax!musocs!mcgill-vision!mouse
Europe: mcvax!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!micomvax!musocs!mcgill-vision!mouse

Hacker: One responsible for destroying /
Wizard: One responsible for recovering it afterward

bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) (11/22/85)

> In article <1988@bmcg.UUCP> bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) writes:
> >> i'm looking for a better description for
> >> the game noughts and crosses.  any takers?
> >
> >The game is played the way one plays "GO". The idea is to 
> >get 5 in a row, any angle.
> 
> You know naught of what you speak.
> 
> First, GO is infinitely more complex than "getting 5 pieces in a row".
> The 5 in a row game is Go-moku (or, I think, Pente).
> 
> Second, noughts and crosses is the British name for tic-tac-toe.
> 
> Paul Hoefling

Well Paul this is Bob again. If you take the game that came across the
net entitled "noughts and crosses" and compiled it, and played
tic-tac-toe with it, you would be at it a looooooooooong time|-).

Go is more complex than "getting five in a row" I agree. But since
I didn't post the game I didn't feel like writing a thirty page rule
book for it. Anyway, in the game that was posted- if you can put five
of your markers in a straight line you win. The same bottom line 
as in Go.

Bob Nebert---------------sdcsvax!bmcg!bobn

jsl@princeton.UUCP (Jong Lee) (11/25/85)

> Go is more complex than "getting five in a row" I agree. But since
...
> of your markers in a straight line you win. The same bottom line 
> as in Go.
> 
> Bob Nebert---------------sdcsvax!bmcg!bobn

wait, are you saying that in Go, you win by getting five in a row?
I hope not.  The object in Go is to capture as much of the 19x19
board as possible, with various handicapping to the players, etc.
the real name to naughts and crosses is omok.

jsl@princeton
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***