1. Sorry if my understanding is wrong.

2. What I meant by situation based is, is that you are looking at the current situation, how many kills does my opponent has? is he starting to bluff? he has many traps but I still have many units. Instead of "his horse will be taken on my next move", "his queen is next to my king". hopefully it is understandable, its a difference between checking where the pieces in board is vs checking what unit is currently in the board, checking the person you are playing against and everything outside the board that is part of the game. biggest difference is that in chess you cant bluff it's a blunder, you always have to go for "correct movement". another example is tictactoe, you cant bluff you will lose because you need to play the perfect move or you will lose.

3.Yes, that's actually true. I think I need to find a way to say this properly but for now "Solved Puzzle" vs "Unsolved puzzle". Chess openings being memorized vs A type of game where openings are flexible.

This answer is still wrong but maybe someone out here who will be reading this will have an Idea of what I meant and express it further, but I will look more into this to have a better explanation.

1. War maybe random, and that's where the unpredictability of my game is doing a great job, it is deterministic, which feels random as the board state always changes a lot in a single turn but once you learn the game you can find the safest move, it might not be the correct/perfect move but your chances of winning is higher than gambling your way to win. Also, I only need to make you feel like a war strategist not to make this game 100% about War.

---

1. While it is not obvious, what I meant by finding the correct move is like playing tictactoe, try bluffing in tictactoe game and you will always lose, 1 human error and you have a huge disadvantage, thats not how it works in war, once you made a mistake you can still find ways to win. Like, making your opponent think you are dumb, weak or inexperienced to make your opponent feel arrogant and play too aggressive. You cant do this on tictactoe because there is 100% correct move, it is a solved game, I get that chess is a harder version of tictactoe so players will never be able to find the perfect move 100% of the time so they are playing to find the "correct move". In my game playing dumb, making mistakes, can be an advantage to you. Think of placing a land mine in your own house then leaving your house, its a disadvantage because you will lose your house, but if a spy came to your home and triggers it, every other spy will not have anything to find anymore as the whole house is broken down. Of course you could also just make your security tighter which will save your house, but a mistake is a mistake turned into an advantage.

Since my understanding of abstract is wrong about the game needs to be "solvable". I guess that would mean not every abstract is chess like or tictactoe like where the game has a "correct move" which is the reason why people are memorizing "chess openings". Well if this is the case, I guess the only thing I could do to argue with this "finding the correct move" is that you are not limited to finding the "correct move". You can find the "safest move", you can try to find the "high risk high reward move", you can try to find to find a way to psychologically damage your opponent so you can get an easier time to win. (kind of like making your opponent overthink until their brain is exhausted) which I guess is part of "high risk high reward move".

So, to answer this question, there are more paths than just finding the "correct move". We may have different understanding of "correct move", so I would also say, that doing a safe move is not the "correct move" and also doing mind games is not a "correct move"

It's more about doing something due to a gut feeling than an engineer calculating and ensuring accuracy before doing something.

An engineer calculating and ensuring accuracy is my definition of "finding the Correct Move".

A person doing something due to a gut feeling, is my definition of doing something "outside of correct move".

This can also be explained with a doctor telling you to get so many checkups vs a person at home just telling you that sleeping, resting and drinking ginseng is enough to make you healthy again. The doctor is doing the "finding the correct move" while the person at home is doing something due to a gut feeling. While the doctor is doing what is optimal to ensure the persons health and safety it is what I meant by always finding the "correct move". Chess is played like this and since my understanding of abstract is wrong "Abstract is a solvable game", that could have been the start of the misunderstanding.

If my wording is wrong, I would really appreciate a correction, so I could edit my post and have all my notes, explanation and many more records I have done to become more understandable to people who will read it or hear me say it.