Check out McCooey's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2025.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Schoolbook. (Updated!) 8x10 chess with the rook + knight and bishop + knight pieces added. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Sep 21, 2009 02:05 PM UTC:
> In the tournament, Zillions will probably only achieve a draw, at
> most, but this doesn't matter if it plays good and interesting chess.
> These are factors which have been tragically left out of computer
> chess.

I don't understand how you can say that. Have you looked at the Joker80 vs TJchess10x8 Schoolbook games at all? I think they are all extremely interesting games, of dazzling brilliance.

And I don't follow your reasoning. What is good and what is poor Chess is determined by the rules of the game and the aim to win. If that good Chess is not aesthetically appealing to your personal taste, it cannot be blamed on the players. The players are bound by the rules, and must do the moves that lead to the best possible result these rules allow. If the result of this optimization is not to your liking, it can only be blamed on the rules.

If a program can see that a Pawn storm will be losing, it won't engage in a Pawn storm. Programming it such that it will start the Pawn storm anyway as a pathetic attempt, so that it willingly runs into the knife and gets slaughtered, might be entertaining to you, but it is simply poor Chess. If you want to see Pawn storms, you should design a Chess variant where it pays to do Pawn storms. Mad Queeen's in general does not seem to be one.