BrainKing - Discussion boards (Feature requests)

Subject: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

Modified by nabla (1. June 2007, 12:01:01)

That White seems to have an overwhelming advantage in "Mancala" could be that the "no moves" rule was set backwards. Indeed, I always heard that when one player had no stones left in his side of the board, HE captured all of the opponent's pieces. In other word, it is of the player's responsibility to ensure that the opponent can always move.

I wikied Mancala, and although it is a wide game family, the rules played here seem to be the rules of "Oware" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oware) . Here is the part of the rules that deal about having no moves :

<quote>
The proscription against capturing all an opponent's seeds is related to a more general idea, that one ought to make a move that allows the opponent to continue playing. If an opponent's houses are all empty, the current player must make a move that gives the opponent seeds. If no such move is possible, the current player captures all seeds in his/her own territory, ending the game.
</quote>

Not the most enlightening way to write it, but I think it means that the remaining seeds are due to the player who finds himself without a move.

1. June 2007, 12:20:11

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

nabla: I wouldn't say that the rules are wrong for Mancala - if there's anything wrong, it would be the name, as Mancala stands for a large family of 'seeding games'. There are probably as many mancala variants as there are chess variants - although in mancala it's not variants of a specific game.

Given the large number of rules (i.e. different amount of pods, different amount of seeds, different rules for reaping, etc), you cannot call it wrong. Although I don't think anyone has found the exact game whose rules are implemented here on any of the lists of mancala games out there. The closest game I have found is the one that is implemented on Nokia phones, and there you also get the seeds in your own pods if the opponent has no moves left.

I'd say, leave the rules as is (or make them the same as in the Nokia game), and add some other Mancala games where white doesn't have the overwhelming advantage.

1. June 2007, 13:04:00

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

AbigailII: I disagree. Whatever the name chosen, if you take an existing game (that is known as balanced) and change a rule (making it unbalanced), then the rules are wrong by any definition that I can think of. Mancala games have a very long tradition, and I am sure that there are higher authorities than Nokia about them.
Actually, naming the game Mancala was a clever try by Fencer to avoid all discussion about the game rules. Indeed I wouldn't have dared to protest if the present rules didn't seem to make the game badly unblanced.

1. June 2007, 13:08:39

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

nabla: But Nokia didn't invent the rules themselves either. They just picked a well-known instance [*] of a certain subclass of Mancala games (a class that has been well studied, with many instances known to be a win for white).

[*] The instances vary with the number of pods (6 each in this case), and the number of intial seeds (4 in this case). I think I've posted links to pages about this variant a while ago.

1. June 2007, 13:11:34

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

AbigailII: And apart from the Nokia phone, did you ever see one of those instances where the player without move lost all remaining seeds ?

1. June 2007, 13:28:33

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

nabla: I am certainly not a Mancala expert, but the first link I tried, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oware says:

If an opponent's houses are all empty, the current player must make a move that gives the opponent seeds. If no such move is possible, the current player captures all seeds in his/her own territory, ending the game.

1. June 2007, 13:39:12

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

Modified by nabla (1. June 2007, 13:40:14)

AbigailII: Yes, that is exactly what I quoted, and you are right that it reads as if when I can't make my opponent play (and only in that case), I take all remaining seeds. But that does not seem to make sense with the two previous paragraphs on the subject, which explain that you must always ensure that your opponent can play. At first I saw it as a clumsy phrasing, now it looks more than a mistake.

Maybe this Wiki text is indeed where the error (if it is one) comes from. I admit that it would require someone more expert than me to judge this.

1. June 2007, 14:02:59

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

nabla: The quote says that you only get the seeds in your own pods if you cannot make a move that gives your opponent a move to make. For instance, all you have (as white) is 3 seeds in a1 and 2 seeds in b1. No possible move will give your opponent a seed.

Note that Oware is quite different from the Mancale game we play here. Oware doesn't have a collection pod, you can only score seeds with captures, which you do by ending your sow in an opponents pod that contains 2 or 3 stones (after seeding).

Another Oware link

1. June 2007, 16:19:04

rod03801

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

It seems this Mancala discussion would be better at this point on the Mancala discussion board That way other people playing the game could chime in more easilly. (People looking to discuss this may not look on this board for that) Thanks!

1. June 2007, 21:55:11

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

rod03801: Ok, I am sorry that I started it, I did not remember that there was a Mancala board...

2. June 2007, 00:02:07

Eriisa

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

nabla: There's never anything wrong with starting it! It is hard to decide when to move it to the game-specific board, isn't it.

1. June 2007, 13:42:10

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

AbigailII: My feeling is reinforced by the mention in the same article that Oware has been solved and that perfect play leads... to a draw !

1. June 2007, 13:09:24

Subject: Re: Wrong rules for Mancala ?

AbigailII: Hmm, I stand corrected, when I reread the rules of Oware, they are indeed not the same as our "Mancala". Does the latter indeed come from the Nokia phones ? That would be a real pity. And I insist that being unbalanced is a major defect in a game.
Probably I am a bit of a nitpicker on this, but I would also like if the game rules stated a reference of where they come from.

1. June 2007, 13:13:27