I first learned about Ultimate Tic Tac Toe here[1]. Might be worth a link to that post -- it's a great explanation with surprisingly satisfying illustrations.
[1]: http://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2013/06/16/ultimate-tic-tac-t...
Actually it also starts the game with 9 moves each which makes things interesting, any collisions match and you can't take three in a row or the middle tile.
I actually decided to stop playing the game rather quickly, because the team is so desperate to move in 5 seconds that they make several terrible moves in a row, easily losing the game in a almost minimal amount of turns possible to lose.
This game can't end in a draw, bc majority gets the win.
More precisely, the game has a finite # of states, and cannot end in a draw. It's always a win for P1 or P2. If both people play perfectly, who wins and what is the optimal strategy? (Note: It is possible that this game is a P2 win, because your move restricts your opponent's choice.) (For the person with the guaranteed win, what strategy forces the win? For the person who can't guaranteed win, what strategy gives your opponent the most opportunity to make a mistake?)
In this game, there are (usually) at most 9 legal moves per turn. The branching factor is a lot less. (Giving your opponent free choice to play anywhere is frequently a mistake.)
This was a blast. Great presentation. Who had the idea to pit GitHub vs Twitter?
BUT, that's just me. Nice app anyway!
First time I've seen that in the wild but I've been using it in lightning talks for a couple of months now. It's pretty slick.
As an example, I just saw team Twitter place a piece in the center square of the top left board (the center board had not yet been won). The Github team then proceeded to place their piece in the bottom right board rather than the center board. It may have been the case that there was a split vote for center and bottom right in Twitter's move that resulted in this bug manifesting itself.
Here are rules and strategy as discussed here prior: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5898506
Team GitHub played [8,1,0] @kn0ll chose [8,2,0]
You need to allow gamers to create small teams, and allow them to talk with one another to discuss strategy. Then they decide on a move.
Someone make chess using the above.
For example, I would suspect far fewer people are willing to invest upfront in a game like yours. It's much easier to find two people who want to play chess against each other where they are fully in control, than two groups getting only one single, slow game out of it.
One way a more thoughtful, strategic game like yours might work would be to achieve critical mass with a simpler, fast paced game and then add depth.