I'm curious why it's not deterministic. If I move E4, it seems to respond with one of three openings at random
The Kilobyte’s Gambit
61–70 of 158 posts
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#62I'm a "meh" chess player, but I do know proper openings and endgames, and I was bested by this engine. But for some reason, when I was only left with a King and a rook, it started blundering all its pieces: Bishop, a rook, 3 pawns, and a knight. It was left with only a king and knight. And by blundered, I don't mean "made a bad move that I was able to take advantage of", I mean literally placed their rook infront of…
Yeah, I managed to trap it into giving up its queen. I was pretty happy. Then I moved my queen to a spot where I did not realize its bishop could just scoot straight through the forest and take my queen. Oops.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#63My problem with this is that the colors make it hard to see the board. I get caught off by missing a long attack vector or a simple exchange. But this is overall an amazing accomplishment. I've played several good games with it so far.
I can't speak for OP, but I doubt this is intended to replace LiChess. It's a uniquely designed proof of concept and a great one. We can give it a creative licence.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#64That’s easy. No.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#65Nice, it's impressive that it can make some coherent move sequences in such short code. I beat it pretty quickly on the first try (it doesn't stand up well to tactics) but the degree of game sense it does have is impressive.
I lost the first game, it goes hard (charges forward acquiring material seemingly without any strategy). I'm a relative noob, but that's the first time I've been able to just adjust my style and easily win on the follow up. Impressive feat, thankfully I wasn't too 'humiliated' by it. Personally didn't spot any sequences in its play. Loved the pixel art and all too, lulls you in. It is a little hard to tell from the p…
There's some very basic move sequences I saw (moving into position for an attack and then executing, for example) but I also saw some odd moves such as opening with 1. ...a5
Because it doesn't have depth it can be tricked with tactics setups (forks, discoveries etc).
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those of us who have no idea how to play chess, what level does an earnest 12 year old play at?
What op probably meant was that the engine knows no theory, but can See when something can be taken and can think a few steps ahead. Not sure if I agree completly, but since you can win in under 10 moves simply focusing on an attack in the king I know what he means (wasn't quite a fools mate, but couldn't protect the Kings side) I think that a 12 year old would play Mord reckless and would make more obvious mistakes.…
Yeah, just tried a fool's mate! It didn't /quite/ work, but pressing on still led to a very early mate, after dealing with an inconvenient pawn. (I think about 15 moves total?)
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#67It took me 4 tries to beat it, and I have a rating of 1300 on lichess.org and 1100 on chess.com. In an effort to guestimate its strength a little more accurately, I had it play the first 4 levels of bots on lichess.org. It comfortably beat the level 3 (1400) bot and got crushed by the level 4 (1700) bot. Combined with beating me 3-1, I would estimate its lichess equivalent Elo rating to be somewhere in the 1400-1500…
No idea what my rating might be. I haven't played in years. I creamed it on the first try. It seems pretty aggressive, but doesn't seem to "think" things through. Pinned his king and forced him to block with his queen after a dozen or so moves, which only delayed the mate by one move. He should have resigned.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#68Nice work! I'm about 1850 in Lichess blitz, and it played at the level of an earnest 12 year old, which is actually meant as a compliment. It got crazy with its kingside pawns in the opening (no book knowledge), lost material pretty steadily and was checkmated down a queen, bishop and two pawns by move 25. But it developed some pieces sensibly, made obvious recaptures and was not reckless about king safety. It avoide…
I agree. I'm at a similar chess rating level, I would add that it is very weak in the endgame. I guess if it only looks four moves into the future it's difficult to see pawn promotions.
I'm of similar rating on Lichess, and agree with the above comments. To be honest, any difficulties I encountered were due to unfamiliarity with the look of the pieces.
Still, it was fun.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#69It took me 4 tries to beat it, and I have a rating of 1300 on lichess.org and 1100 on chess.com. In an effort to guestimate its strength a little more accurately, I had it play the first 4 levels of bots on lichess.org. It comfortably beat the level 3 (1400) bot and got crushed by the level 4 (1700) bot. Combined with beating me 3-1, I would estimate its lichess equivalent Elo rating to be somewhere in the 1400-1500…
I'm around 1050 on chess.com, I could beat it in the very first attempt.
It missed pinned checks and lost Queen and almost all of its material.
I may say its chess.com rating might be around 600-700.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#70I'm a "meh" chess player, but I do know proper openings and endgames, and I was bested by this engine. But for some reason, when I was only left with a King and a rook, it started blundering all its pieces: Bishop, a rook, 3 pawns, and a knight. It was left with only a king and knight. And by blundered, I don't mean "made a bad move that I was able to take advantage of", I mean literally placed their rook infront of…
I think I've seen it start blundering more when the prospects are otherwise very bleak - if the best available move (with a depth-4 search) leads to a mate, who cares if you sacrifice a rook? I wonder if there was a quicker route to a mate you'd missed...