Talk:Nim

message: I have rewritten the mathematical part of the article, and deleted most of the material on strategy, because it was (IMO, anyway) disorganized, confusing, didn't contain any information (all the painfully constructed "winning patterns" there are simply special cases of the general Bouton's characterization), and sometimes  incorrect (why the hell was Ling Kah Jai credited for a well-known 100 years old result?). Nevertheless, in case somebody decides to reintroduced bits of the text, here it is. -- EJ 9 July 2005 17:12 (UTC)
----
I've put the text from the old version of the article that was once here on the subpage /Deleted text.  4pq1injbok 19:33, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Does the name last move game for normal Nim actually have any currency?  4pq1injbok 06:30, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Last move game

message: For those who have the latest version of Enigma, take a look in Enigma level pack 2, level 16 (Enignimm). The thing is, you'll have to play and win two games to access the Oxyd stones locked away but there is only one heap! The first heap has 13 blocks and the second has 16. I don't think I can calculate the Nim-sum because it now has four binary digits. The only way I ever won this game is nearly by chance. In the first heap, the computer starts first, but in the second, you get to start first. What's the process of calculation?
[Later after examining code of level...]
I just found the solution. Basically, you have to use the correct subtractand so that you can get 13, 9 and 5 blocks remaining(These numbers are what makes the computer take away (random number between 1 to 3) blocks). By using the correct subtractand to get the numbers I explained, you can win both games and unlock the door to the Oxyd stones and complete the level. Again I ask, what's the process of "calculating" this?  --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 11:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another variation... 

message: "there is an easily-calculated way to determine which player will win " -- assuming this player doesn't screw up. jnestorius(talk) 22:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  which player will win  

message: Talking about this version: . Someone should insert a "rules" section before the "illustration" section.
Also, this sentence in the illustration section makes no sense: "In order to win always leave an even number of 1's, 2's, and 4's." It doesn't make sense as a win condition, because the player who did that didn't win. It also doesn't work as a winning strategy, because the player who did it lost. --68.161.152.145 04:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rules 

message: After i read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links i don't know if i can add
the following external link [very_simple_game]
where, using AJAX techniques, I developed a program to free play at "nim"
in the variant "who is getting the last element loses". There are 8 schemas, at growing difficult level.
The solver server-side algorithm, was developed in PHP and it is of kind recursive reduction with sorted cached.
Sorry for my bad english, my natural language is Italian.
Thanks, MacApp.--MacApp (talk) 12:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New external link: nim developed in AJAX 

message: In 1979-80, I acquired a number of games playable on the TRS-80 Model I microcomputer.  One was "Android Nim".  In this version, 18 androids are displayed on the screen, eight in the top row, six in the middle, four in the bottom.  The left-most android of each row has a "ray gun", and on instruction of the player (computer user versus the computer), one of the armed androids inspects its line to see if there are enough androids to take out as per the quantity indicated by the player. After confirming this, the android nods at the screen and raises its ray gun. The androids all turn their heads to look at the android with the ray gun raised. The ray gun fires, "dissolving" the number of androids required. The next player then selects which row and how many.
If the computer user wins, the computer sometimes tries in vain to ask an android to destroy androids it does not have, and the armed android shakes its head. When the user's winning move is completed, the computer selects a half-dozen adjectives from a program list that generally describes the incredulity of the computer that the user has won.
The computer then asks if another game is desired.
I can only play it if I fire up my old Model IV computer (vintage 1984) in Model III mode, but I'm not certain if I still have readable floppy discs to do it. A version of this game true to this version, but usable on modern IBM compatibles with Windows, would be welcome! GBC (talk) 06:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer version 

message: : The name is probably derived from German nimm! meaning "take!"
Why the exclamation marks?  Does the word "nimm" mean something different without it? -- Smjg (talk) 08:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "nimm!"? 

message: Hello, I added this "100 game" which I once saw in a TV show and which kept me mumbling for a whole day...194.39.218.10 (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: I added the 100 game 

message: There was an article called "Pawn duel".  There was no reference to that name being used, except a website that plays the game.  I renamed it Northcott's Nim, but that isn't quite accurate either (no first move restriction).  What do you think about that article being merged into this one?  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: On second thought, I think I'll prod that article because of a lack of references and notability.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  PAwn Duel/Northcott's Nim 

message: Sorry, but the Strategy does not make sense (at least to me). If there are only 1 in each of 3 heaps then the strategy elucidated here would lead one to remove one item (which is also the only legal move) and would leave a Nim sum of 0. This of course results in the current player loosing, when the other player removes one, despite the fact that this strategy is supposed to guarantee a win. So either I have misunderstood something, or the strategy needs further explanation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.251.4 (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is for the normal game, not the Misère game.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.82.178.88 (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it just me? 

message: It appears the strategy is incomplete. 1 xor 1 xor 1 is indeed 1, but it is also a winning strategy. 1 xor 1 is indeed 0, but it is a losing strategy. So it seems when every heap is size 1 then you need the nim sum to be 1 instead of zero.
72.234.110.47 (talk) 10:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is for the normal game, not the Misère game.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.82.178.88 (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not just you 

message: Not being dim: can 'nim sum' be better sum-med up(given that the text says 'any number' of items can be removed)? 193.132.104.10 (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nim sum 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
----
:Nim →  – No clear primary topic for this 3 word term, the game has 7,838 views but the programming language has 4,084 and Nim Chimpsky who appears to commonly just be "Nim" gets 8,215[]. Google mainly appears to return the game but the programming language is the 1st result, Images appears to be split between the game and chimp and Books is split between the game and various uses. It seems likely that the game is the most common usage in terms of PT#1 if the chimp is known more often by his full name, by PT#2 the game may be the most significant usage but as a 3 word acronym its not clear it the game would be primary for the 3 word acronym when some of them may also have more long-term significance. Redirect to NIM or move that to Nim. Crouch, Swale (talk)  18:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This nomination seems confused.  The game has massive long-term significance: it is a fundamental example in the field of combinatorial game theory and has been studied for more than a century.  Where do you get the idea that the word "Nim" is a three-word acronym?  The article says "Its current name was coined by Charles L. Bouton of Harvard University, who also developed the complete theory of the game in 1901, but the origins of the name were never fully explained." --JBL (talk) 13:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the NIM DAB lists things in the "Technology and engineering" and "Other uses" sections that are three word acronyms. Crouch, Swale (talk)  14:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  You wrote .  I parse this as an assertion that the name of the game Nim is a 3-word acronym (which is not true), and this is consistent with other comments in the proposal.  May I request you edit / clarify the rationale for the proposal? --JBL (talk) 17:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  done, I agree my wording was poor/confusing. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 January 2022 

message: It really seems out of place. Does it contribute anything to the discussion by saying that certain constants 3 and 1 were used in a particular episode of a particular reality show at one particular point in time? That just reads weird. Ok to remove? Corwin.amber (talk) 11:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, ok. --JBL (talk) 18:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to Survivor: Thailand is obscure 

message: The following paragraph:
"Normal-play nim (or more precisely the system of nimbers) is fundamental to the Sprague–Grundy theorem, which essentially says that in normal play every impartial game is equivalent to a nim heap that yields the same outcome when played in parallel with other normal play impartial games (see disjunctive sum)."
Has been replaced with this paragraph:
"Nim is fundamental to the Sprague–Grundy theorem, which essentially says that every impartial game is equivalent to a nim game with a single pile."
I don't know enough about the subject to tell whether these statements are equivalent, but it seems to me that "a nim game with a single pile" would be trivial for a player to win in a single turn: either take all the matches under "normal game" rules or take all but the last match under misère rules. Clarification would be appreciated. 38.27.102.50 (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single pile nim games and Sprague-Grundy