What's the effect of significant WL play on a person's existing chess rating? Please, share your experience (including before/after chess elo).

There's been some discussion comparing WL to chess as an AI problem here:
https://www.warlight.net/Forum/145427-chess-warlight

There's even a lengthy 2013 thread about an informal chess league/tourney for WL players here:
https://www.warlight.net/Forum/5859-warlight-chess-tournament?Offset=160

UPDATE:
There are not nearly enough responses to draw any conclusions, but the anecdotes below are interesting.

One player reports no change, another reports a decrease in chess rating, and another claims a very high chess elo that has not yet translated into a high WL elo.

So a preliminary guess is that extensive training and achievement in either game provides little or no benefit to the other. A proposed explanation is that achievement in either depends heavily on accumulation of domain specific knowledge (and less on development of 1 or more forms of brain fitness) that is non-transferable.

Edited 6/2/2016 18:46:08

No effect.

Interesting. My guess is you already had a fairly high (1800+) chess elo before joining WL?

Maybe that's the case.

My chess skill has decreased as my warlight level has got better.

^More WL = Less Chess and vice verca.

As long as one don't take time away from the other, then maybe they have a positive effect.

It is not of any relevance but I remember a story.

---

"X" was a middleman between Champion "Y" and Champion "Z".
"X" claimed to each champion that he was playing.
"X" won half of his games.


Many people were interested in the identity of "X".
It was discovered that he was no champion but very ordinary.
A few times, the alleged champion was a young child.


This strategy is very old. Many cases in 19th century and older.

---


Chess is a good game for cheating.

---


The early turns matter the most because it eliminates many bad "branches".


Chess is a little like Rubik Cube (puzzle & probabilistic). You have all your opening and counter-openings.


4+ turns is foresight.

^More WL = Less Chess and vice verca.

As long as one don't take time away from the other, then maybe they have a positive effect.

More WL = Less Life and vice versa.

"X" was a middleman between Champion "Y" and Champion "Z".
"X" won half of his games.

Half is also a common win percentage for players in the solitaire chess league.

Chess is a good game for cheating.

Nowadays, a human can cheat by using moves from an automatic chess machine. A few hundred years ago, a human could create a hoax by hiding in a box and pretending to be an automatic chess machine.

Edited 5/30/2016 17:54:30

More WL = Less Life and vice versa.

Too bad we don't have elo ratings in life. We could measure earnings but that's too limited.

:)

Edited 5/30/2016 19:09:29

i have a chess elo of 2100 but my WL elo..... well let's not talk about it ;) (hint: it is REALLY low)

The early turns matter the most because it eliminates many bad "branches".
... You have all your opening and counter-openings.

In WL games with random warlords and wastelands, There is no library of openings and counter-openings. They have to be computed anew each game based on general principals. However, the principals themselves could theoretically be collected, but it seems likely the process of doing this--let alone using such a database--is a very complex problem. Like the chess openings, it's likely such a database would not be useful outside of WL.

Approximation algorithms can reduce the size of the data greatly.

Reduce the size of the chess opening library? Interesting. That would be useful as this library initially grows (super?) exponentially with the number of moves into the game.

However, the WL list of picking principals mentioned above ends up being a set of heuristics: an algorithm. It's a component of any functioning WL AI. It may be possible to create a relatively small yet very competitive picking algorithm for a given template or even a class of templates and maps.

Edited 6/2/2016 21:08:04

Pretty much the only thing that would work to make a small decent AI is :


Agent with agenda OR AUTONOMOUS AGENDA.

-----------------

It is used in almost every major RTS. The idea is that the AI can adapt to different situations, including situations you did not predict.

It is very simple and dumb-proof to make.


Simplest is Goal Oriented Action Planning (GOAP).

Game AI Agent in Google gives lot of links.


http://gamedevelopment.tutsplus.com/tutorials/goal-oriented-action-planning-for-a-smarter-ai--cms-20793


Tutsplus, best site. :))))

=========


http://aigamedev.com/premium/interview/uabot-search-rts/


Starcraft analysis AI !!! GREAT !!!!!1111111

==========


Edit :

Even Roblox gives tutorials on GOAP so it is really dumb-proof. Anyone can understand this.

Edited 6/2/2016 22:23:08

Great links, thanks!