Computational Complexity of Generalized Push Fight

We analyze the computational complexity of optimally playing the two-player board game Push Fight, generalized to an arbitrary board and number of pieces. We prove that the game is PSPACE-hard to decide who will win from a given position, even for simple (almost rectangular) hole-free boards. We also analyze the mate-in-1 problem: can the player win in a single turn? One turn in Push Fight consists of up to two "moves" followed by a mandatory "push". With these rules, or generalizing the number of allowed moves to any constant, we show mate-in-1 can be solved in polynomial time. If, however, the number of moves per turn is part of the input, the problem becomes NP-complete. On the other hand, without any limit on the number of moves per turn, the problem becomes polynomially solvable again

Philosopher's football

Combinatorial games are games where the players alternately take moves. In the game we do not have any chance devices that could impact on the game randomly. Players have complete information about past moves to decide how to play on. The rules are such that the game must eventually end. Philosopher’s football or Phutball is a not so well-known combinatorial game which is the focus of this work. We present why the game is difficult and why determing whether a player can win in a given situation in one move is an NP-complete problem. We prove it by reducing to an already known NP-complete problem 3-SAT. We have also implemented Phutball application for two players, which is accessible through a web browser

Philosopher's football

Combinatorial games are games where the players alternately take moves. In the game we do not have any chance devices that could impact on the game randomly. Players have complete information about past moves to decide how to play on. The rules are such that the game must eventually end. Philosopher’s football or Phutball is a not so well-known combinatorial game which is the focus of this work. We present why the game is difficult and why determing whether a player can win in a given situation in one move is an NP-complete problem. We prove it by reducing to an already known NP-complete problem 3-SAT. We have also implemented Phutball application for two players, which is accessible through a web browser

Games, puzzles, and computation

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2006.Includes bibliographical references (p. 147-153).There is a fundamental connection between the notions of game and of computation. At its most basic level, this is implied by any game complexity result, but the connection is deeper than this. One example is the concept of alternating nondeterminism, which is intimately connected with two-player games. In the first half of this thesis, I develop the idea of game as computation to a greater degree than has been done previously. I present a general family of games, called Constraint Logic, which is both mathematically simple and ideally suited for reductions to many actual board games. A deterministic version of Constraint Logic corresponds to a novel kind of logic circuit which is monotone and reversible. At the other end of the spectrum, I show that a multiplayer version of Constraint Logic is undecidable. That there are undecidable games using finite physical resources is philosophically important, and raises issues related to the Church-Turing thesis. In the second half of this thesis, I apply the Constraint Logic formalism to many actual games and puzzles, providing new hardness proofs. These applications include sliding-block puzzles, sliding-coin puzzles, plank puzzles, hinged polygon dissections, Amazons, Kohane, Cross Purposes, Tip over, and others.(cont.) Some of these have been well-known open problems for some time. For other games, including Minesweeper, the Warehouseman's Problem, Sokoban, and Rush Hour, I either strengthen existing results, or provide new, simpler hardness proofs than the original proofs.by Robert Aubrey Hearn.Ph.D

The Complexity of Deciding Legality of a Single Step of Magic: The Gathering

Magic: the Gathering is a game about magical combat for any number of players. Formally it is a zero-sum, imperfect information stochastic game that consists of a potentially unbounded number of steps. We consider the problem of deciding if a move is legal in a given single step of Magic. We show that the problem is (a) coNP-complete in general; and (b) in P if either of two small sets of cards are not used. Our lower bound holds even for single-player Magic games. The significant aspects of our results are as follows: First, in most real-life game problems, the task of deciding whether a given move is legal in a single step is trivial, and the computationally hard task is to find the best sequence of legal moves in the presence of multiple players. In contrast, quite uniquely our hardness result holds for single step and with only one-player. Second, we establish efficient algorithms for important special cases of Magic

Phutball is PSPACE-hard

Abstract: We consider the n×n game of Phutball. It is shown that, given an arbitrary position of stones on the board, it is a PSPACE-hard problem to determine whether the specified player can win the game, regardless of the opponent’s choices made during the game