You don’t necessarily need to. There’s a possibility of defining instructions for winning without that. The idea may just be hard to imagine because chess is complicated.
You can make up stupid examples of games that defy this. Maybe we dream up a game with an ungodly number of states that has an action X that is an available option every turn. If the winning strategy is just “player 1 chooses action X every turn”, you can imagine there may be a way to show that’s true without needing to simulate every single state, and there’s certainly a way to easily store and communicate this strategy.
For a ludicrously dumb win condition, maybe the first playet to press X 10,000,000 times wins. You should be able to show that pressing X every turn is a winning strategy without computing every potential state. This can be true of more complicated games too, it would just be much less obvious. Just because no one has conceived of a way to do that yet with a game such as chess doesn’t mean no one ever will.
=> More informations about this toot | View the thread | More toots from christian@lemmy.ml
=> View 9bananas@lemmy.world profile
text/geminiThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).