 |
DROP - On each turn, each player drops a stone on an empty cell. |
|
GOAL - Wins the first player making a 5 in-a-row (orthogonal or diagonal in any 3D direction) with friendly and (eventually) neutral stones . |
Copyright (c) 2000 Jim Lundberg
This game is played on an 5x5x5 cell board with the following setup (the initial red stone is a neutral stone or using Lundberg's terminology, a free space):
|
Some words from the author: After several
months of analysis, Edward Jackman
& I have come up with a possible variant of the 5x5x5 Tic-Tac-Toe game that
may work for everyone. [...] Edward demonstrated the 'strong draw'
nature of the basic version of this game by giving me 3 moves to start and was
able to block my best attempts at winning. We quit about 1/2 way through
the game after all the main lines were blocked by him. Of course he was
only demonstrating a certain style of play where the 2nd player was hell bent on
creating a draw. This is kind of unordinary for about 99.95 percent of the
play I have witnessed with my board game called "Pentagonal" [...].
Now I'm cognizant of the fact that many games have been "killed" by
elite abstract strategy gamers by ripping them apart and reducing them to a
simple algorithm that removes all attraction to playing them at all. But I
believe we have found the solution that may make some of you'all think a bit.
My original variant was to use a single 'free-space' in the center of matrix,
which has the most lines or planes passing through it (11). So what we
have come up with is an extension of the free-space concept. The center
space should still always be a free-space, unless you are playing a novice and
want to give them somewhat of an advantage. But here is the interesting
part: the difficulty of this game can be adjustable. Both players then
start alternately placing free-space pieces on any position they like, accept
you cannot create more than 3 free-spaces on any line (or obviously the 2nd
player would win). It appears that 5 may be sufficient, but this may be
incorrect. Once one player wants to start playing, they place their piece
down, but using yet another equalizing rule, the other player can then replace
this piece with their own. Play then continues in the traditional fashion,
but since there are probably several 2 space lines in several directions, it is
probably unproductive to try and just play the blocking game by either player.
It is most fun when both players are playing to win anyway!
The question still in our minds is this: Just how many free spaces does it
take to satisfy the true analytic minds out there? Edward had proposed
that all of the major '6' spaces be made into free-spaces:
V
W X
Y Z
a b c d e a b c d e a b c d e a b c d
e a b c d e
1 F . . . F X X . . . O . O . . X . . . .
F . . . F
2 . . . . . . F . F . . . . . . . F . F .
. . . . .
3 . . . . . . . O . . . . F . . . . O . .
. . . . .
4(O). . . . . F . F . . . . . . . F . F .
. . . . X
5 F . . . F X . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F . . . F
Jim Edward
1) X2c X1c
2) Wa1 Wc3
3) Ya1 X1a (forced)
4) W5c Y3c
5) Z4e V4a
...but if you continue the above game, you will see the first-move-win nature
of this configuration.
Edward also has suggested an interesting pattern:
V
W X
Y Z
a b c d e a b c d e a b c d e a b c d
e a b c d e
1 . . . . . . . F . . . F . F . . . F . .
. . . . .
2 . . F . . . . . . . F . . . F . . . . .
. . F . .
3 . F . F . F . . . F . . . . . F . . . F
. F . F .
4 . . F . . . . . . . F . . . F . . . . .
. . F . .
5 . . . . . . . F . . . F . F . . . F . .
. . . . .
but we have not played this configuration yet. Edward has also come up
with a rather unique concept in making the outside of the matrix a 'virtual
wrap', where one side is connected to the other side, or top to bottom, and
making it a 4 in a row game, thereby circumventing a middle block, but I don't
think that will work very well. So if any of you care to exercise your analytic
prowess and figure out the best range of the number of free-spaces needed, you
may get a free copy of the game board matrix I have patented and is in the final
production run of 500 (out of 2500 total). I feel it is between 5 and 9, but
Edward thinks it is more.
I feel this board matrix may be viewed as an abstract "deck of cards" that can accommodate numerous games, most of which have probably not yet been invented yet.
