Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 78 posts

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#21

Post by atdt »

IIAOPSW wrote: post #17
doggydogs94 wrote: post #13

A comment in the original article says it best: ... Changing the rules tends to neutralize acquired knowledge ... and beginning players like this because it levels the playing field.

^This, but its a good thing. Something that irks me about Chess is that at the high level the conventional wisdom is to memorize openings and gambits rather than derive moves from some sort of first principals. IMO this undermines the entire point of a strategy game.

Fischer Random Chess (aka Chess960) is meant to address exactly that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer_random_chess

It has a large online following.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#22

Post by kranner »

breuleux wrote: post #18
kranner wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My idea for a chess variant was giving every piece a fixed number of moves (with move-count visible at all times). After the quota of moves is finished, the piece becomes immobile except that it can still capture an enemy piece (and thus move to the captured square).

Sounds interesting! It could be played easily on a physical board by putting poker chips under the pieces. Without a way to replenish counts there is a risk of deadlock, though. Maybe an option to pass to recover one move on a piece of your choice?

I hadn't thought that far! The poker chips are a great idea. Perhaps a reset mechanism after both sides run out of moves would work too.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#23

Post by lisper »

Here's an idea (probably not original): simultaneous chess. Both players write down their moves and, once they have both committed, both moves are executed in parallel. If two moving pieces end up on the same square, both are eliminated. If one piece moves onto a square that has been vacated by an opponent's piece in the same move then no capture takes place.

Addendum: One benefit of this variant is that it is completely symmetric and hence completely fair. There is no advantage for either side because neither side moves first.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#24

Post by blendergeek »

breuleux wrote: post #14

I had an idea for a chess variant recently that I haven't had time to test yet (but maybe it already exists?): it's exactly the same as normal chess, except on your turn you can move any piece, black or white, even your opponent's king (God chess?) You still have to eliminate the other king, and a piece can still only take pieces of the opposed color, obviously. I suppose it very well might turn out to be completely…

> but in my head it sounds interesting.

It really does sound interesting to me as well. I suggest you grab a friend or random chess-playing stranger and challenge them to a game of "God-mode chess".

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#25

Post by inakarmacoma »

lisper wrote: post #23

Here's an idea (probably not original): simultaneous chess. Both players write down their moves and, once they have both committed, both moves are executed in parallel. If two moving pieces end up on the same square, both are eliminated. If one piece moves onto a square that has been vacated by an opponent's piece in the same move then no capture takes place. Addendum: One benefit of this variant is that it is comple…

KungfuChess online multiplayer

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#26

Post by esrauch »

atdt wrote: post #21
IIAOPSW wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^This, but its a good thing. Something that irks me about Chess is that at the high level the conventional wisdom is to memorize openings and gambits rather than derive moves from some sort of first principals. IMO this undermines the entire point of a strategy game.

Fischer Random Chess (aka Chess960) is meant to address exactly that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer_random_chess It has a large online following.

It doesn't seem to be that large of an online following: it's supported on the main chess sites but not as one of the top default modes.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#27

Post by esrauch »

searchableguy wrote: post #4
endori97 wrote: post #3

If you've abandoned chess.com for lichess.org, you might be surprised to learn that chess.com now hosts 15 variants.

Is there any variant where both players play blind every other move or in the starting?

There's a 'fog of war' variant where you can only see the squares that a piece of yours could move to.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#28

Post by lisper »

inakarmacoma wrote: post #25
lisper wrote: post #23

Here's an idea (probably not original): simultaneous chess. Both players write down their moves and, once they have both committed, both moves are executed in parallel. If two moving pieces end up on the same square, both are eliminated. If one piece moves onto a square that has been vacated by an opponent's piece in the same move then no capture takes place. Addendum: One benefit of this variant is that it is comple…

KungfuChess online multiplayer

Not the same thing. KFC is real-time.

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#29

Post by seabass »

esrauch wrote: post #27
searchableguy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any variant where both players play blind every other move or in the starting?

There's a 'fog of war' variant where you can only see the squares that a piece of yours could move to.

--that a piece of yours could attack, I believe, not move to

Re: Ideal Chess – drop chess perfected?

#30

Post by bombcar »

breuleux wrote: post #14

I had an idea for a chess variant recently that I haven't had time to test yet (but maybe it already exists?): it's exactly the same as normal chess, except on your turn you can move any piece, black or white, even your opponent's king (God chess?) You still have to eliminate the other king, and a piece can still only take pieces of the opposed color, obviously. I suppose it very well might turn out to be completely…

One jerk move possible - just undo the other player's move the moment that becomes possible (pawns can't move backwards, for example).
Post reply on HN