I loved this footnote: "NB: if puzzled by a pawn move, please check for en passant before reporting a bug"
For anyone confused, see https://www.reddit.com/r/AnarchyChess/comments/l2d0b7/google... for context.
The Kilobyte’s Gambit
81–90 of 158 posts
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#82This is awesome. Really impressed at the level of play given the size of the program.
Somewhat amusingly, in the game I played, it went all in pushing the flank pawns, also a tendency favored by top Chess engines :)
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#83Doesn't properly implement pawn promotion, assumes Queen
It specifically says this beforehand
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can see the Math.random call in the source code: https://nanochess.org/chess4.html#sour
That doesn't answer the question. Yes, it's random, but why? Is it just to avoid repeating move sequences so you can't replay the same game multiple times?
Ah, then yes, likely for two reasons.. to prevent the exact same game from happening if you play the same moves, and also as a way to choose between equally weighted (in terms of expected value) moves
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#85Earlier 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.…
I'm getting a kick out of this thread because, having hardly played chess since age 12, this game instantly reminded me of games in the middle school library.
It seems like there's broad agreement on skill level.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#86I've played that a bunch of times this afternoon -- and succeeded in beating it in a few games.
I've been able to grab a few of its pawns early in the game. (I think its weakness is it assigns a low priority to protecting pawns. Or maybe it isn't able to look ahead far enough to see that I've got two attacks on the pawns instead of one.) It also didn't seem to be able to anticipate a "discovered check." It's good at setting up forks -- although at least once it forked me and then when I'd moved my King, didn't take the other piece!
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#87It 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…
Lichess stockfish bot ratings are completely fake and performance dependent on your local device.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#88It 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…
Looks like it's rated around 1225: https://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404/cgi/engine_details.cgi?pr...
On CCRL, which is a separate rating pool/scale. Also, it played too few games to get a reliable rating, as you can see from the erratic performance.
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#89I'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.
Yup. Bishops and pawns are sneaky with these graphics. I also Botez gambited
Re: The Kilobyte’s Gambit
#90Nice 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…
For those of us who have no idea how to play chess, what level does an earnest 12 year old play at?
I joined my girlfriend to a chess tournament of the local club once. Old vs. young. They were an adult short, and I know the rules, so I volunteered to play - otherwise there would be a kid without an opponent every round (my plan had been to write some code in a corner, but entertaining the kids, why not right?).
I lost every game. The kids were something like 10 years old. Admittedly, I know little more than the rules, but I expected to at least give one or two of them trouble by playing logical. Not so...
They had the best time, seeing in how many moves they could beat me. In my last game I tried an unusual (okay, stupid) opening hoping to at least break any pattern they have, but that just made me lose even faster. Be weary of 12-year-olds if they're playing in a chess club!