MindSports
Emergo Tutor
 |
About
Rules
Basic Tactics
Strategy
Games
Read Me

Problems
 |
Problem 1 Problem 2
Problem 3 Problem 4
Problem 5 Problem 6
Problem 7 Problem 8
Problem 9
Problem 11 Problem 12
Problem 13 Problem 14
Problem 15 Problem 16
Problem 17 Problem 18
Problem 19 Problem 20
Problem 21 Problem 22
Problem 23 Problem 24
Problem 25 Problem 26
Problem 27 Problem 28
Problem 29 Problem 30


Emergo Problem 10
Sorry, you need a Java enabled browser to view this Emergo problem!

1. c45d6b4x
2. b53xbd4x
3. c3e5xd4f6x
4. eg5xf75x
5. f64xf53x
6. a12f35x
7. a2c6xf53x
8. c64xc53x
9. c42xc31x
10. g56c13x
11. c24xf35x
12. f46x Bold notation indicates the player had in fact a choice of moves. This is an idea of Ron Jacobsen who comments on Emergo in the letter below. I've carefully considered his suggestions to fix white's first move advantage after the entering stage was over under the previous rules. Eventually I decided to solve the problem by reverting to the traditional idea of an initial position.

Dear Christian,

I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to your publications (be they electronic or otherwise) on the game of Emergo. This letter contains an example from actual play that might be instructive in your Emergo Tutor. It also led me to a composed problem that you might want to include either in the tutor, or on the Problem Page of your website.

But first I have a couple of comments and suggestions.

  • 1. Emergo contains a very large number of completely forced moves as compared with most other board games. As a result, I think it is useful in the notation to distinguish between forced and unforced moves. When I record my games, I typically put the unforced moves (including those where there is a choice of capture) in bold type face. When reviewing a game record, this notational convention makes it easier to see who is maintaining the initiative, how balanced the fight was, and where the critical decision points were.
  • 2. With regard to notation for problems, I think the term Clear in X should be used when White is expected to capture all enemy pieces in X moves, rather than just establish a won position. This is the equivalent of 'Mate in X' used in chess, but in Emergo, 'mate' just doesn't sound right.
    Also, again because of the large number of forced moves, I think that 'X' should refer to the number of unforced moves. (Thus, in the problem given later in this letter, I have specified 'Clear in 8' because white has 8 decisions to make, even though the full lines are 12 moves long). This is important because in chess (and I suppose other games) a problem which contained a lot of forced moves for Black would be considered very ugly and not be taken seriously by real problemists. But you can't avoid the forced moves in Emergo, and indeed creating very long sequences of forced moves has artistic merit. (If fact, the first construction problem for Emergo enthusiasts probably ought to be to construct the longest possible chain of forced moves.) By limiting 'X' in the problem specification to only the unforced moves, we imply that the forced moves are recognized to be of no strategic significance, and therefore are not to be considered as a blemish on the problem.
  • 3. I was wondering how you think it is best to quantify a side's material advantage in Emergo. I assume this would be a topic in your Emergo Tutor. I like to count 'expendable' pieces, which is the number of pieces a side has available to sacrifice without giving back any captured pieces. This is the measure I use in a discussion below.
  • 4. Finally, as you point out on your homepage, it is very difficult for Black to break White in a correspondence game. The initiative is just too powerful. It seems to me that this begs for a rule change to fix the problem. While I think it may be hard to reduce the value of the initiative and remain true to the essence of Emergo, I do think it should be possible to change the mechanics of the entering stage to create a more even fight for the initiative. I think that someone should test the following two rules to see if they balance the game.
    • (a) Pieces can be placed on empty spaces without restriction during the entering stage, but no jumps occur until all pieces are entered. Forestalling the jumps would allow the construction of more complicated piece arrangements whose resolution down to a favorable initiative would not be so easily managed by White as in the current game.
    • (b) Allow one or both sides to 'reinforce' one or two pieces (i.e., build a stack of two) during the entering stage. This would allow some defense against feeder combinations as a two man stack cannot be as easily decapitated.
Sincerely, Ron Jacobsen