Live data from Hacker News

Ancient Roman Board Game

ludus-coriovalli.web.app

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#21
post #3

Too assymetric IMO. I have no problems winning with hounds even on hard, but I have no chance of winning except against easy.

The symmetry is restored if you say you're playing a two game match and the winner is the one that survives longer as the hares. But the game seems simple enough that I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to play optimally.

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ancient example of an unbalanced meta. Maybe we are missing some of the patch notes for balance changes

Maybe the concept of desiring balance is modern. Maybe they wanted to encode asymmetry in the game to mirror nature, or the Master / Slave dynamic which they likely considered to be a natural law.

Or they just switched sides and played again, which is less silly.

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#24
post #4

> No written rules for this game survived antiquity. To reconstruct how the game may have been played, researchers turned to the Ludii General Game System — a comprehensive digital platform developed at Maastricht University that can model and simulate thousands of historic board games. The results were published in the journal Antiquity (Volume 100, Issue 409, 2025). > Using Alpha-Beta search agents — the same class…

> No written rules for this game survived antiquity… a comprehensive digital platform… that can model and simulate thousands of historic board games.

Model and simulate based on what?

> Nine game configurations matched the wear criteria.

So their idea was to generate candidate rulesets, have AI try to figure out rational play, then see which pieces would be moved most often and match that to the forensic evidence?

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ancient example of an unbalanced meta. Maybe we are missing some of the patch notes for balance changes

Maybe the concept of desiring balance is modern. Maybe they wanted to encode asymmetry in the game to mirror nature, or the Master / Slave dynamic which they likely considered to be a natural law.

The Netrunner card game is very asymmetric and very modern. I guess you could say it's balanced but nothing asymmetric can be perfectly balanced.

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#26
post #3

Too assymetric IMO. I have no problems winning with hounds even on hard, but I have no chance of winning except against easy.

I guess you have to put it in context. There are old tic-tac-toe boards also sculpted in stone ( https://legioxiiisl.blogspot.com/2013/02/roman-board-game-te... ), which is a very bad game. Anything would be better.

Maybe they were playing Gobblet Gobblers instead which is a much more fun game on the same size board.

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#27
post #4

> No written rules for this game survived antiquity. To reconstruct how the game may have been played, researchers turned to the Ludii General Game System — a comprehensive digital platform developed at Maastricht University that can model and simulate thousands of historic board games. The results were published in the journal Antiquity (Volume 100, Issue 409, 2025). > Using Alpha-Beta search agents — the same class…

This seems impossible. If you started with chess pieces and a chessboard or even a go board and go pieces, it is absolutely impossible to reconstruct the game as they’re currently played.

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#28

Another ancient board game to be decoded is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Game_of_Ur . This is from 2600BC so is older to Christ than Christ is to us. The videos on the game (and all his other videos) with Irving Finkel, a curator at the British museum, are spellbinding. He has the looks, manners and enthusiasm of an eccentric museum curator from central casting!

> A partial description in cuneiform of the rules of the Game of Ur as played in the second century BC has been preserved on a Babylonian clay tablet written by the scribe Itti-Marduk-balāṭu.

This is much more palatable and cool since they’re not just randomly guessing what the game can be like this article is

Re: Ancient Roman Board Game

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ancient example of an unbalanced meta. Maybe we are missing some of the patch notes for balance changes

Maybe the concept of desiring balance is modern. Maybe they wanted to encode asymmetry in the game to mirror nature, or the Master / Slave dynamic which they likely considered to be a natural law.

Every casino game is asymmetric. I believe the casinos are trying to encode the Charlatan/Chump dynamic.
Post reply on HN