This has bugged me for a bit. If chess engines are meant to always play the best moves, then how come two chess engines playing against each other doesn’t always have the same winner?
In: Other
They’re far too many possible outcomes to predict how the end result will be or even what the second or third move might be. There’s too many potential moves to make depending on who you think you’re playing and what your personal strategy is. Machines, computers are no different. Sure, you could give each one a different strategy or you could have the same general library of moves and strategies available, but the outcome of every single choice are going to be dependent on the choice the other makes. And that is not set in stone. The number of potential moves every single time is not infinite, yet, to the perspective of a human being it might very well be. And every single move determines the next move based on your own priority and what you believe the opponents will be., or even more options available then the average human who might have learned a few or simply will play reactive game. Since the dawn of the game of chess, we have not seen every single move that could be made in every order that it could be done, and nowhere near every single potential game has been played. In fact humans could probably play for the rest of their existence and still not play every potential game. They’re simply that many potential moves and games that could happen. I’m not sure what the question was anymore however, I’ll end it there.
Latest Answers