Not that I know of. A decent AI is not likely to happen any time soon, because it's more complicated than Chess. Also, there's less people playing Stratego than Chess.

last multiplayer game I ever played (as a kid obv) I won in 2 moves and then said "I'm never playing you in any game ever again".

I kept my word but sigh @ bad things you say as a kid...

Is Stratego more complicated than chess for reals? I did not know that.

Also it would be fewer people not less people cause people are discrete.

The internet says so ldo must be true.
But aside that, more pieces per side, so more combinations of possible positions / outcomes.
And information isn't perfect so even when the number of pieces drops to the same as in Chess, just the possible positions would be far greater than in chess, let alone the possible future positions.

Well, Stratego is imperfect information, so much harder to find a decent strategy than in perfect information games like Chess.

Yes, more combinations in Stratego, I believe, because of the imperfect information, and more pieces, but the movement is far more restricted. It'd be an interesting math problem to count the number of arrangements possible for each side's starting position.

Barely interesting.

In the standard variant with 8 scouts, 6 bombs, 5 miners, 4 Captains, lieutenants and sergeants, 3 Majors, 2 colonels the amount of setups is 40!/(8! * 6! * 5! * 4! * 4! * 4! * 3! * 2!) = 1.4E33

Right, well a decent AI would likely place pieces in descending ranks into heirarchies, and compute "board control" or something like that. The game becomes much less complicated learning-wise as the pieces come off and there are lots of positions where an extra major should be sufficient, because you trade-off controlling the three "swim lanes" (left flank, right flank, center), and then the major controls the vital territory. An AI would also be able to draw when it's the end of the game, and the AI has a Scout left, and an unapproachable flag (bombed off with no enemy miners), and would be able to find draws in the game trees. I'd THINK that Stratego might be less complicated computer science wise than chess, but more complicated math wise than chess. Similarily Omaha 8/b might be more complicated math wise, but less complicated strategically, than Hold'em.

Thanks for doing the math btw, now I remember how to do those types of problems. Out of practice.

Surely Stratego is much harder computer science wise than chess because of incomplete information and many more pieces, therefore many more combinations.

But, think of Omaha 8/b for example, many more combinations, is it truly more complicated? You can find general rules, I think. I have not researched AI enough to know. I think it's entirely possible that you can take an advantage, squeeze off the choke points, capture the flag, and keep a draw in reserve, and have a powerful opponent without the complexity of chess. The other factor is that chess players are more advanced as there is a larger community, so it is comparing apples to oranges in that regard.

If you're talking about the perspective of solving the game, then Stratego is more complicated. Otherwise, I am not sure which one is more complicated. What I am saying is that a larger game tree is not necessarily a more complicated one.

Take for example the case of a standard Stratego draw.

It can be defined like this, "In this scenario, our army is outmatched, but our Flag is unapproachable, because our opponent has no Miner(s) left, and it is Bombed off. In our Army, we have at least one Scout left, and can move the Scout back and forth, and therefore cannot lose."

You do not need to do billions of calculations to solve that entire tree, and recognize it as a draw, even if you were programming an AI. This is perhaps the best use of an AI in Stratego. And, you have simplified billions, perhaps trillions of leaves in a game tree with this simple algorithm. This would be my starting point if I were to make a Stratego AI.

Then you expand it, recognize that you need to have the dominent army, and at least one Miner left to win the game.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say the game is far more balanced than chess percentage wise and the first move matters far less. It may be a provable draw (though not in my lifetime), but I think Stratego should be thought of a game of draws, and going for a win early on is usually a mistake. So, I play defensive Stratego now.

AI, I think it's possible to have a few algorithms for what good play looks like, and then construct the AI with a simplified game tree, like, "Have the suprior Army, control the lanes, look for double-threats, and trap the weaker pieces." And have a few sentences like that into stored algorithms, and it wouldn't be too bad.

Now, here's where it becomes interesting. With chess, to calculate a draw, you either need to consult a massive database with all games with 7 pieces each remaining which has been pre-solved (win,loss,draw for each position), and then try to reduce the millions of combinations to find the best outcomes using some programming to analyse position and material. Either it seems to me that chess seems far more complicated at this, or I simply do not understand the finer points of Stratego, which is possible, because there aren't all that many "finer points", because it is by far the less analyzed game.

td;dr

Stratego seems simpler if you do not think of it in terms of raw calculation, but algorithms to guide you to victory (or draws).

If anyone wants to play a game at www.stratego.com/play
Fun game it is

Signup is free, only if you want to pimp your account with nonstandard artwork or more setup slots, you need to pay

Find me in a week or two and I'll be happy to have you kick my butt a few games.

I am such a n00b, can barely get up to 250 after playing lots and lots of games.

I have played only 7 games. Lost first two, then won 5 in a row.

My nick is OUWESOK

Okay, I'll try to play you. I record the video on my laptop. My nick is leavesofliberty. I think I'm only like ~220 right now. Currently checking out Stratego Bob's YT which is 400+.

5 wins got me from 100 to 163 - Bronze Sergeant.

For me it is tough to make time between family matters and work

Dunno how I can add you as a friend without seeing you in the list

Bronze General already @stratego.com, winning 14/18

Having started with 3 losses (one of which because I quit during setup) that is a nice comeback

If I hadn't drilled my general into a first row bomb, I would have had a win streak of 15, since I was nicely ahead in that one too

The biggest error of bronze players is to give away cheaply the position of their big pieces.

No idea where my peak will be bronze-silver-gold-platinum, but silver for sure and platinum surely not. I forget pieces too often

I find bob's videos unwatchable. His style isn't mine. I would highly recommend to view the games of maxroelofs. You will learn various good strategies. Mainly the power of the unknown piece. Strong players use that a lot and keep you guessing and pressure you to make mistakes by losing material or exposing your own big pieces for way too little.

Also chocking a player side by placing two higher pieces in front of two known pieces so he cannot use an entire wing and has less space to maneuvre. Weak players end up hitting your pieces out of curiosity and you win free material. If not, you enjoy your space advantage.

I have climbed up to 300+ and Silver Spy. My first two Silver opponents were aggro. One was a ****** who managed to hit bombs with both general and marshal before even capturing a captain.

The other guy played a more controlled Marshall Blitz and kept his general+spy in defense while attacking with Marshall and Colonel supported by miners and scouts. He took a Major. I exchanged generals and allowed his spy to flee and found a major. His scouts ran out, so he started banging with his colonel into my structure until he hit my marshal. I trapped his major between a major and colonel and he misguessed so I was a clean colonel up and some small material down. He played the endgame terribly, moving too many pieces and while my colonel controlled his major and my major controlled his captain, my captain created havoc and allowed a minor to capture his flag. gg.

update:
After 128 games I made gold level (gold spy, ELO >500). Bronze-silver-gold-platinum. That puts me squarely in the upper 5% of the site but still waaaaaaay behind the top players.

Heh, see me play a game of Stratego online. I am OuweSok @ stratego.com

Do you have another upload? Missed it.

Also, I did read a paper from a machine learning scientist in Berkeley on Stratego.

https://www.google.com/search?q=mach...rning+stratego

Not yet to silver, but I think I'll get there eventually. Stratego is greatly underestimated as a skill game, and has playability that rivals contemporary parlor games including chess, poker, and backgammon.

Played my first game. Was on stratego com. Beat the computer but then got smoked by a human. Learned lots though.

Inspired to test it out. Computer is idiotic, at least at medium setting.

If you want to play vs a computer, you can download and install the current world champion Probe. The Stratego.com AI is horrific.

I actually deleted my videos and put up a real youtube channel like a boss

Gabethebabe's Stratego Youtube Channel

My Alias at Stratego.com is OuweSok.

There are plenty of my games, starting with Silver Major opponents (ca. 400 rating) to a Gold Major (ca. 600 rating). Some videos as well about two setups that I recommend and a game between two world class players on Gravon.

If you are playing high bronze and low silver opponents, you really must watch this video about a setup that destroys the lotto-ers and blitzers that you see at this level and has fine playability against normal opponents as well.