111–120 of 243 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There must be a threshold above which making an engine move is allowed. Because if there's a checkmate move, it will be the best engine move and needs to be allowed.
No; checkmates are not needed. You win the game by almost checkmating the opponent: by leaving them only one legal move, which is thus necessarily the top engine move.
How does this work for forced moves? If there is only one possible response to a move that move must be the top engine move.
How does this work for forced moves? If there is only one possible response to a move that move must be the top engine move.
When they make the move you claim that’s the top engine move, and you’d be correct.
How does this work for forced moves? If there is only one possible response to a move that move must be the top engine move.
> If a player only has one move available, that move will always be the top engine move, which loses the game.
I think the 'challenge and win' concept is too strict. Just make the move disallowed. You'll need the computer to be paying attention at all times, but nonetheless it would be more enjoyable to play.
I think the 'challenge and win' concept is too strict. Just make the move disallowed. You'll need the computer to be paying attention at all times, but nonetheless it would be more enjoyable to play.
Anytime you can checkmate is going to be the computer’s recommended move.
I've been thinking about a possible chess variant to eliminate opening preparation drudgery. The Fisher 960 variant tries to do this, but it can be very different from regular chess, and some of the positions are unbalanced. I think we can use the fact that engines know when a position is even. There must be millions of even positions in the first 10 or so moves. Pick one of those randomly, and start the game.
To make top level chess more interesting I have a handful of ideas that work in tandem.
1. Change the scoring and rating systems so that a win is worth more than two draws. E.g a win is 3 points for the winner, draw is 1 point to each player. Game theoretically this should favour players that play for a win and avoid easy draws. But also modifying the rating system is crucial, otherwise we'll get the same drawmeisters dominating the rating list.
2. Change the repetition rule to be similar to xiangqi(Chinese chess) where repetitions are illegal and don't lead to a draw. This eliminates most of the lowest effort draws right out of the gate.
3. Make the game sharper and more complex. The easiest way to do this is just to remove the concept of castling altogether. Former world champion Kramnik has advocated this, and computer analyses of the ruleset is promising. King safety is suddenly a hard problem to solve in most openings and the game becomes much, much sharper.
4(optional). add more pieces. The best way is Seirawan-chess, a modification of Capablanca chess that adds a knight-bishop(hawk) and knight-rook(elephant) without changing the board geometry and starting position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Top engine move changes with evaluation time I think that's like saying you can't play scrabble because the dictionary changes over time. You specify the engine and wait time before you start a game.
No, there are no top engine moves in practice, and in theory.