Redstone is a variant of Go. Capturing is executed with neutral, red stones. Redstone is not a territory game. It's a game of annihilation.
https://www.marksteeregames.com/Redstone_rules.pdf
John Kerry, editor of Abstract Games magazine, has written an article about Redstone.
https://www.abstractgames.org/redstone.html
Christian Freeling, renowned abstract game designer, is currently studying Redstone in preparation for an article. I'll keep you posted.
I've often heard Go described as "Minute to learn; lifetime to master." Two problems with that. Go is not quite "minute to learn," and a game should never be mastered.
I remember reading a small book on Go many years ago, and coming away from it understanding the basic surround-and-capture concept, but not completely understanding how to play. Reading that book took way more than a minute. Dodo is minute to learn. Silo is minute to learn. Go is not minute to learn.
Mastering a game is like mastering a judge. Not something one would normally aspire to do. The game should be the master. Not you. If by "master" you mean "achieve some arbitrary skill level," like the top 10% of players in the world, awesome. Go forth and master.
Redstone is naturally finite. That was my imperative in designing it. I know. Go is finite because it has superko. Any game can incorporate superko and call itself finite. Like, "You can never repeat a position because you're not allowed to repeat a position." Brilliant. That's why I said "naturally" finite. I've heard that "in practice" finitude is never really an issue in Go. For me, it's not about "in practice." It's about architecture. I don't design non-finite games.
Redstone uses the pie (switch colors) rule. Inexplicably, pie never seems to be used in Go. Pie makes a game much more fair between experts - less of an unequal game. I guess pie wasn't around when Go was invented. Instead, the archaic komi is used which, being non-integral, has the added advantage of precludng ties. Redstone doesn't need komi because, as I said, it's a game of annihilation. The only possible "score" is 1-0. Ties can't happen.
Redstone has been mentioned, discussed, admired and disparaged many times in the ten years since I designed it. I've heard Redstone positively compared to Go and negatively compared to Go. Despite the obvious similarities, Redstone is a whole different game. One positive thing about Redstone is that it can reasonably be played on a smaller board.
Another Redstone advantage is that it's easier to learn than Go. There's no ko, triple ko or superko - so no pointless "ko fights" to get sucked into. There's only one version of Redstone. Every country has a different version of Go - some versions more complicated than others.
I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of Go or Redstone play. For me, Redstone was just an exercise in architecture.
If you're interested in Go but are reluctant to open such a big can of worms, try Redstone. It's a smaller can of worms. Later you can switch to the more complicated Go... or just stick with Redstone. Why not?
Redstone is now played exclusively on the single most awesome game site known to man. Board Game Arena !!!! You can play Go at like 100 different game sites, but you can only play Redstone here.
Before now, Redstone was never deemed worthy of being programmed anywhere, which is odd. Many of my other games generated much less interest than Redstone but they were programmed. Dipole is played at nine game sites. Cephalopod at eight. Atoll at six. Yet nary an article has been written about any of them.
Does Redstone carry a stigma? Lots of Go variants have been programmed, but none I know of that have dared to actually restructure the hallowed game of Go. Redstone doesn't pay homage to Go. It overhauls Go !!
Maybe Redstone's dismissal for ten years was just a quirk of fate. In any case, now I've programmed it. I did so at the entreaty of colleagues who believe Redstone to be an important game. Sometimes if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Or in this case, if you want it done at all, you have to do it it yourself.
Now that I've programmed Redstone, other game sites will probably start adding it. Like, "Oh wow, we didn't know about Redstone." Yeah right.
I put some realistic touches into the UI. The stones are photos of actual slate and clamshell Go stones. The red stone is a photo of a ruby - a lab grown ruby I bought on eBay for $27. No expense was spared in the production of this program. Go players are notorious for their haphazard placement of stones, so I added a little random offset to the stone placement. This is not a bug
I hope you will enjoy Redstone.
Mark
https://www.marksteeregames.com/Redstone_rules.pdf
John Kerry, editor of Abstract Games magazine, has written an article about Redstone.
https://www.abstractgames.org/redstone.html
Christian Freeling, renowned abstract game designer, is currently studying Redstone in preparation for an article. I'll keep you posted.
I've often heard Go described as "Minute to learn; lifetime to master." Two problems with that. Go is not quite "minute to learn," and a game should never be mastered.
I remember reading a small book on Go many years ago, and coming away from it understanding the basic surround-and-capture concept, but not completely understanding how to play. Reading that book took way more than a minute. Dodo is minute to learn. Silo is minute to learn. Go is not minute to learn.
Mastering a game is like mastering a judge. Not something one would normally aspire to do. The game should be the master. Not you. If by "master" you mean "achieve some arbitrary skill level," like the top 10% of players in the world, awesome. Go forth and master.
Redstone is naturally finite. That was my imperative in designing it. I know. Go is finite because it has superko. Any game can incorporate superko and call itself finite. Like, "You can never repeat a position because you're not allowed to repeat a position." Brilliant. That's why I said "naturally" finite. I've heard that "in practice" finitude is never really an issue in Go. For me, it's not about "in practice." It's about architecture. I don't design non-finite games.
Redstone uses the pie (switch colors) rule. Inexplicably, pie never seems to be used in Go. Pie makes a game much more fair between experts - less of an unequal game. I guess pie wasn't around when Go was invented. Instead, the archaic komi is used which, being non-integral, has the added advantage of precludng ties. Redstone doesn't need komi because, as I said, it's a game of annihilation. The only possible "score" is 1-0. Ties can't happen.
Redstone has been mentioned, discussed, admired and disparaged many times in the ten years since I designed it. I've heard Redstone positively compared to Go and negatively compared to Go. Despite the obvious similarities, Redstone is a whole different game. One positive thing about Redstone is that it can reasonably be played on a smaller board.
Another Redstone advantage is that it's easier to learn than Go. There's no ko, triple ko or superko - so no pointless "ko fights" to get sucked into. There's only one version of Redstone. Every country has a different version of Go - some versions more complicated than others.
I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of Go or Redstone play. For me, Redstone was just an exercise in architecture.
If you're interested in Go but are reluctant to open such a big can of worms, try Redstone. It's a smaller can of worms. Later you can switch to the more complicated Go... or just stick with Redstone. Why not?
Redstone is now played exclusively on the single most awesome game site known to man. Board Game Arena !!!! You can play Go at like 100 different game sites, but you can only play Redstone here.
Before now, Redstone was never deemed worthy of being programmed anywhere, which is odd. Many of my other games generated much less interest than Redstone but they were programmed. Dipole is played at nine game sites. Cephalopod at eight. Atoll at six. Yet nary an article has been written about any of them.
Does Redstone carry a stigma? Lots of Go variants have been programmed, but none I know of that have dared to actually restructure the hallowed game of Go. Redstone doesn't pay homage to Go. It overhauls Go !!
Maybe Redstone's dismissal for ten years was just a quirk of fate. In any case, now I've programmed it. I did so at the entreaty of colleagues who believe Redstone to be an important game. Sometimes if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Or in this case, if you want it done at all, you have to do it it yourself.
Now that I've programmed Redstone, other game sites will probably start adding it. Like, "Oh wow, we didn't know about Redstone." Yeah right.
I put some realistic touches into the UI. The stones are photos of actual slate and clamshell Go stones. The red stone is a photo of a ruby - a lab grown ruby I bought on eBay for $27. No expense was spared in the production of this program. Go players are notorious for their haphazard placement of stones, so I added a little random offset to the stone placement. This is not a bug
I hope you will enjoy Redstone.
Mark
) I may do a video review highlighting Redstone in the future. Best of luck adventuring forward!
