I won second try with hares on medium, I think the trick is to:
replyA) make sure you get at least one hare to one of the central two spots (will always be possible) and camp it there. Keep your other hare moving around on your side.
B) the opponent will have to bring two hounds over to catch your other hare. To do this they will have to create a gap between the first and second hound in the middle spot above/below your camped hare. As soon as this happens, move your camped hare upwards.
It's pretty easy after that TBH. The AI has usual burnt a load of moves by that point and you have so many options from that position
I guess you have to put it in context. There are old tic-tac-toe boards also sculpted in stone (https://legioxiiisl.blogspot.com/2013/02/roman-board-game-te...), which is a very bad game. Anything would be better.
replyMaybe they were playing Gobblet Gobblers instead which is a much more fun game on the same size board.
replyAncient example of an unbalanced meta. Maybe we are missing some of the patch notes for balance changes
replyMaybe the concept of desiring balance is modern. Maybe they wanted to encode asymmetry in the game to mirror nature, or the Master / Slave dynamic which they likely considered to be a natural law.
replyThe Netrunner card game is very asymmetric and very modern. I guess you could say it's balanced but nothing asymmetric can be perfectly balanced.
replyEvery casino game is asymmetric. I believe the casinos are trying to encode the Charlatan/Chump dynamic.
replyOr they just switched sides and played again, which is less silly.
replyThe symmetry is restored if you say you're playing a two game match and the winner is the one that survives longer as the hares. But the game seems simple enough that I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to play optimally.
reply