droping vs. moving games

I tried many types of games. Some I liked some not. E.g. I tried To learn Go but I was't able to. I realizied that games where you have To drop your stones are very hard for me To play. Games with moving elements seem To be clearer for me. What are your experiences?

I think you are over-generalizing. Go, despite its simple rules, can be hard to grasp for a beginner. But I think this is due to its particular depth and subtleties rather than the fact that the stones drop rather than move.

droping games?

I am exactly opposite. Since Go stones stay put where they are (with the exception of the occasional captured stone), I can look ahead much more easily then in e.g. chess.

@christian: I mean games where you are laying down your stones like Hex, Go, Havanah etc. The opposite I call moving games, where you move your stones. Like chess, Loa or BT.

As it happens, someone started a "placement- versus movement games" thread called lucidice at BGG just recently, with an interesting premiss of sorts.

I am sure that mr. Freeling has an oppinion on this, but I think humans are generally more able to look severAl moves into the future in placement games.

Well, mr. Freeling is kind of divided on the subject. I don't experience much difference in my (limited) capacity to visualize either placement or movement. For me there's always the feel of the 'organic' quality of placement games that is so clearly visible if the 'movie' of such a game is played. I feel I'm better at uniform games though, or semi-uniform ones like Draughts. I seriously suck at say Chess, not to mention Grand Chess. As an inventor I'm also drawn to the 'uniform and organic' type of game, at least nowadays.

People have different abilities. All strong chess players I have met are able to play blind games. They may not be strong at it, but they visualize where every piece is and how they interact. I simply cannot do that, that's why I have always sucked at chess. I was never able to play beyond the "tactics barrier" so chess is not strategic at my level. I can only win against people who suck even more and that's not fun. On the contrary, Go is a game at which I have kept improving, you don't really need to visualize future boards (maybe really strong players do, but you can be a decent player without that). Watching some of Catalin Taranu's videos on eurogotv I get an idea of how deep a pro can read, of course, I will never reach that level, but the game is still very interesting to play at my level.

My advice: If you are bad at "moving games" try "dropping games".

I like to think I excel in being lousy at almost all types of games. I simply have no short term memory, and can barely look one ply ahead. I play by sense of smell.

Your rating suggests that you are good at golem word game

I typically have an easier time visualizing and reading ahead in placement games (including go) than in movement games (including chess & shogi).

From the point of view of interest & enjoyment, I like both types of game. (And of course hybrids too, e.g. Slither). :)

The more you play, the better you get. I was originally a chess player and have only started playing the connection games more recently. I'm also pretty inexperienced at games like Shogi and LOA, however I've certainly picked these up more quickly than the likes of Hex and Twixt.

Having said that, I enjoy all of the games on here!

@erratic: I took your advice and I'm playing now Gomoku pro a first atempt to placement games, but I'm confused about the openings. Thread is launched.

Best games allow drops *and* movements, like Shogi :-)

@Elsabio: I don't know much about Gomoku. I have tried but it looks very combinatorial to me. Ok, stones don't move, but it still is about visualizing future boards very deeply. I recommend go. Learning go is like learning a new totally unrelated language. It is hard to start, but as you keep working you see you are improving. Deep reading is not so important. At a similar level it is, but when there is a big difference with your opponent (and in go there is a looong way from 30 kyu to 9 dan), reading is not going to make you win the game. Go is about learning and practicing and very rewarding.

@erratic: Okay now I'm curious. If I got you right, you say Go is less tactial and more strategical. If this is true isn't it better To start with a 19x19 board instead of a 9x9 board as often recommended?

@Elsabio: Maybe 9x9 is better in the beginning because you play more games fast. I don't think it is important. You have to play a lot (and lose a lot of games) to get a sense of the game. Read, do problems, watch games... Until you understand life and death and the basics you will probably not enjoy too much. The board size will be important later, when you understand what you need to win a game. In the beginning just play a lot any size.

@Elsabio: After learning and playing several games on 9x9 it's acceptable to move to 19x19 board in real-time games. I think however that for double digit kyu players 13x13 games could be more instructive because board is simpler but still some strategic elements like influence occur.
If you however want to play mostly correspondence games I strongly recommend you playing on small sizes at least while you don't feel restricted by them, because of much shorter time needed for ending game. Correspondence 19x19 GO is very lengthy. Shorter games make beginners learn more and I believe give them more fun.

Thanks a lot for all thos hints!