hist-games: alea evangelii

M Winther mwi9 at swipnet.se
Fri Jun 27 22:33:58 PDT 2008


Den 2008-06-28 05:42:03 skrev Damian Walker <damian at snigfarp.karoo.co.uk>:

> Quoting Jon at Gothic Green Oak's message of Yesterday:
>
>> With the exception of the 9x9 tafl game, which is recorded ethnographically
>> with its well known starting position and alea evangelii as shown in the
>> 9th/11th/12 C manuscript the layout of the 7x7, 11x11 and 13x13  is entirely
>> conjectural. Excepting the 7z7 tafl game which is too small for much
>> variation, if the 11x11 and 13x13 boards (and possibly the 15x15 board form
>> Coppergate) were laid out so that  instead of the four separate camps of
>> attackers there was a more open layout along the lines of alea evangelii do
>> you think this would make a difference to the length of the game and the
>> frequency of wins by either side? Without having attempted this I imagine it
>> would disadvantage the king but lengthen the game making it possibly a more
>> even and interesting game (king unarmed)  - has anyone tried this?
>
> I think that the length of the game, if it remains balanced, is probably
> mostly affected by the number of pieces.  The layout can, however,
> affect the balance.  I worked out that the optimal number of pieces for
> a size of board S is 6 x S - 29, but this assumes a serif-cross layout
> like tablut.
>
> The alea evangelii has 73 pieces, as opposed to the 85 that my formula
> would result in.  But I'd describe the layout as more closed than
> open--the pieces are in a more advanced position and the blockade is
> already partially completed.  This balances things out a bit; if the 73
> pieces were arranged tablut-style I think the king would be favoured
> more than he already is.
>

Above all, it depends on what rules were used for the the game.

Mats


More information about the hist-games mailing list