Body: <p>Who would be more likely to win a match, an AI that pick an random legal move, or an AI that picks an random piece/pawn with legal moves and then a legal move from it?</p>
  <p>The second AI, consider castling a king move.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T16:23:38.907Z
Comments.Text: Welcome to StackExchange!  This question might be a little too broadly worded as it stands and lead to too-opinion based a reasoning for the focus of this S.E.  Perhaps you could re-word it to a more narrow scope with a more objective possible answer?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Charles Rockafellor
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T16:25:25.790Z
Comments.Text: What is the difference between the two?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Minot
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T17:01:30.960Z
Comments.Text: @Minot the former will for example more likely move its queen since it has the most legal moves, in the latter case the queen moving is as unlikely as any other single piece.
Comments.UserDisplayName: koedem
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T17:22:40.130Z
Comments.Text: Both would be so unlikely to win against any reasonable player that it would be hard to tell the difference.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alexander Woo
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T22:06:00.520Z
Comments.Text: @AlexanderWoo True, but you could interpret the question as asking which is more likely to win if the two bots play against each other.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Especially Lime
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-08T22:57:50.803Z
Comments.Text: If all the moves are random, it has nothing to to with intelligence (artificial or not). Answering this question involves exploring a huge tree of random choices... I don't think it can be done. At most, you could write programs playing that way, let them play a few million times, and see if one wins more often than the other.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Fabio says Reinstate Monica
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-12T16:17:57.223Z
Comments.Text: Re your last paragraph, I doubt that either of these bots would often have the opportunity to castle because it is quite likely that the king or rook move wildly around before the fields between them are cleared :)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Hagen von Eitzen
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-12-14T13:11:01.853Z
Comments.Text: @kinomani, if you specifically mean that these two AIs are going to play *each other*, then if you update the question to say this it would no longer be 'opinion-based'. If you mean which would do better against _other_ players then I fear there is no way of knowing. Unless there's an online site that accepts 'undercover' bots, that you could try them out on.
Comments.UserDisplayName: AakashM
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2023-02-11T10:31:47.690Z
Comments.Text: Why's this opinion-based? I think it's really random piece and then legal move. I mean...there's less randomness...?
Comments.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Tags: <strategy>
Title: Who would be more likely to win a match, an AI that pick an random move, or an AI that picks an random piece/pawn and then a legal move from it?
ThreadText: # Who would be more likely to win a match, an AI that pick an random move, or an AI that picks an random piece/pawn and then a legal move from it?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2022-12-08)
  
  Who would be more likely to win a match, an AI that pick an random legal move, or an AI that picks an random piece/pawn with legal moves and then a legal move from it?
  
  The second AI, consider castling a king move.
  
  **Tags:** strategy
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Welcome to StackExchange!  This question might be a little too broadly worded as it stands and lead to too-opinion based a reasoning for the focus of this S.E.  Perhaps you could re-word it to a more narrow scope with a more objective possible answer?  
  > **username_2**: What is the difference between the two?  
  > **username_3**: @username_2 the former will for example more likely move its queen since it has the most legal moves, in the latter case the queen moving is as unlikely as any other single piece.  
  > **username_4**: Both would be so unlikely to win against any reasonable player that it would be hard to tell the difference.  
  > **username_5**: @username_4 True, but you could interpret the question as asking which is more likely to win if the two bots play against each other.  
  > **username_6**: If all the moves are random, it has nothing to to with intelligence (artificial or not). Answering this question involves exploring a huge tree of random choices... I don't think it can be done. At most, you could write programs playing that way, let them play a few million times, and see if one wins more often than the other.  
  > **username_7**: Re your last paragraph, I doubt that either of these bots would often have the opportunity to castle because it is quite likely that the king or rook move wildly around before the fields between them are cleared :)  
  > **username_8**: @username_0, if you specifically mean that these two AIs are going to play *each other*, then if you update the question to say this it would no longer be 'opinion-based'. If you mean which would do better against _other_ players then I fear there is no way of knowing. Unless there's an online site that accepts 'undercover' bots, that you could try them out on.  
  > **username_9**: Why's this opinion-based? I think it's really random piece and then legal move. I mean...there's less randomness...?  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  