matematiko wrote:
Is that all you see or you think is behind auto-chess, an engine and nothing more?
Yes, it is most likely my inexperience with autochess - I am unaware of all the thought, planning, engine/book tweaking, and even programming that goes into it... so, my guess is that the reason you do it is more point 5 - you enjoy the whole process of customizing and running engines and systems for optimal performance... but I will not answer for you!
I am still eager to see what you have to say.
For the Nascar example, I see your point BUT there is an inherent difference: if you are playing engine vs. engine then it is a level playing field and I can see how you might tweak the engine to outwit your engine playing opponent... to see who has the best engine/setup (this would be like Nascar: all things pretty much equal, just some refinements on pit crew skill, engines, teams, management, drivers). But playing autochess vs. a human seems like entirely an unlevel playing field. It would be like in Nascar where you have a very powerful engine and your opponents have lawnmower engines... or you have a whole pit crew, and your opponents have to change their own tires. Do you specifically target only autochess opps, or do you think playing humans is fair, enjoyable and worthwhile too? I think the idea of even super-grandmasters vs engines has all but been abandoned now days because engines are just too powerful, so I don't see the point in this.
