|
People treat some chess prodigy playing multiple chess opponents like it's some kind of huge accomplishment, but I say it's not. If you're skilled enough to consistently win a single game of chess, then it's not too much of a stretch that you could win three or four or ten "at the same time." It's a turn-based game so it's not like you simultaneously have to fend off ten different attackers, or that your decisions in one game affect your position in the others. You can take as much time as you need between turns to figure out your next move and if you/re more skilled than your opponent, you're gonna win. It's time to take the chess hype down a peg, IMO.
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:59 |
|
|
Whats with the timer poo poo? I mean, you can't speedrun chess, its a pvp game, it makes no sense!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Circle gets the square!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
satanic splash-back posted:Whats with the timer poo poo? I mean, you can't speedrun chess, its a pvp game, it makes no sense! I don't understand the timer or the point system. Like, is it possible to capture the opponent's king, but for him to still win the game on a technicality? If not, why track the points?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
take the move the last guy made against you and play it against the next guy. you will win a bunch i used to do this on yahoo chess - just input every move your opponent makes against you into chessmaster 5000 highest difficulty and play its response against your opponent. A+ way to troll old people on the 'net
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
While we're at it, let's also take down Chess's less successful cousin: Checkers. Checkers is a dumb game for babies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
ehhhhhhnnnnnn posted:take the move the last guy made against you and play it against the next guy. Hahaha A+ gold idea right there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:I don't understand the timer or the point system. Like, is it possible to capture the opponent's king, but for him to still win the game on a technicality? If not, why track the points? Hidden mechanics are the truest measure of skill. Only the newbies believe everything is presented to the player. Like, castling is bullshit, because you only know about the move because somebody told you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
ehhhhhhnnnnnn posted:take the move the last guy made against you and play it against the next guy. Guess I know what I'm doing this weekend.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
You know what would be impressive? Facing multiple opponents on the same board. They can't take each other's pieces and they're all after you. You have to take down three enemy kings to win.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
ehhhhhhnnnnnn posted:take the move the last guy made against you and play it against the next guy. You know what would be funny is if your opponent were secretly doing the same thing and you end up with two computers duking it out through human proxies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:You know what would be impressive? Facing multiple opponents on the same board. They can't take each other's pieces and they're all after you. You have to take down three enemy kings to win. I think Five Way Chess would be awesome, especially if we encouraged temporary alliances
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
What about a game of chess with each piece having a mystery syringe full of drugs the guy has to do when that piece is over
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
satanic splash-back posted:Hidden mechanics are the truest measure of skill. Only the newbies believe everything is presented to the player. Like, castling is bullshit, because you only know about the move because somebody told you. Castling really is bullshit, it seems almost like it doesn't belong in the game. Some king somewhere was losing at chess a hundred years ago and made up castling to save his rear end and because he was king nobody could argue with him. Later, somebody else tried to use it against him and he made up the "oh well you can't castle if your king or your rook have moved before" rule.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
No rush, 15 turns. TIA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
My tactic is to spam pawns until my opponent is exhausted, then bust out my rooks (Rooks are the strongest piece).
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
playing multiple games of table tennis or bumming at once would be quite impressive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
And what the hell is with en passant capture anyway? It's like in anime where a sword dude rushes passed another sword dude but then realizes they've been cut in half. Anime sucks and so does en passant capture.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
Germstore posted:And what the hell is with en passant capture anyway? It's like in anime where a sword dude rushes passed another sword dude but then realizes they've been cut in half. Anime sucks and so does en passant capture. Totally forgot about en-passant! Anyone who uses that move is  as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Germstore posted:And what the hell is with en passant capture anyway? It's like in anime where a sword dude rushes passed another sword dude but then realizes they've been cut in half. Anime sucks and so does en passant capture. Little known fact: while castling is bullshit, en passant capture makes complete sense because it is based on real life. The well-known anime phenomenon is based on real life experience. That is what makes it (anime and chess) so captivating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
they sell those 3 way chessboards which look p neat, imo.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
The Queen is the most powerful piece on the chess board. This seems awfully close to ancient social justice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:You know what would be impressive? Facing multiple opponents on the same board. They can't take each other's pieces and they're all after you. You have to take down three enemy kings to win.  A guy I know used to run this store and one of the things he stocked were all these different variations of the game, like 4-way chess and a card game called Knightmare Chess which adds cards which changed the default rules
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
I tried to play chess against 10 people at the same time once but they wouldn't let me wear my huge hat
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
I can't loving wait for quantum computing to solve chess and it turns out that white always wins no matter what. Then chess will be a 50/50 coin toss, whoever gets black loses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
satanic splash-back posted:The Queen is the most powerful piece on the chess board. This seems awfully close to ancient social justice. People in the past catch a lot of poo poo, but the role and power of women in society didn't really start to diminish until the industrial revolution. Prior to that, the woman was the head of the household and had authority in all domestic matters. The man was the head of the family overall, but power was definitely shared more evenly in society (since "women's work" in those days was just as vital to the survival of civilization as anything men did and so was accorded a proportionate level of respect). RE: the Queen in particular though, I think her strength on the board is rooted in proto-chess games from the Middle and Far East where the "queen" was actually the Vizier or Viceroy or some poo poo, and thus the Emperor's catspaw. When the game got Anglicized, they had a choice between making the queen the most powerful piece or I guess putting her "in charge" and they weren't willing to go that far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_variants People out there have developed some interesting variants on chess arrangements and rules. Like this one, which has a cool name: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
The game shouldn't end until both the king and queen are captured, IMO, since the army could still fight under the queen's command.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
satanic splash-back posted:The Queen is the most powerful piece on the chess board. This seems awfully close to ancient social justice. Applewhite posted:People in the past catch a lot of poo poo, but the role and power of women in society didn't really start to diminish until the industrial revolution. Prior to that, the woman was the head of the household and had authority in all domestic matters. The man was the head of the family overall, but power was definitely shared more evenly in society (since "women's work" in those days was just as vital to the survival of civilization as anything men did and so was accorded a proportionate level of respect). In the Persian ancestor to chess, shatranj, the queen was known as fers or wazīr, a type of councillor to the king. The introduction of chess to the Western world coincided with the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, and she and other influential European queens of the time influenced the renaming of the piece
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_variants considering my playstyle is to torment people with pawns and knights this is extremely my poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
chess boxing is a pretty cool concept because if you're losing the game you can still win by giving your opponent a severe concussion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
My only finishing move is the one where you wield the rooks like a pair of scissors so my entire game is geared towards setting my opponent up for that and if I can't do it I become extremely flustered and ineffective.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
I mean, you can still do that in regular chess but I think that's frowned on by FIDE and will probably affect your rating
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:My only finishing move is the one where you wield the rooks like a pair of scissors so my entire game is geared towards setting my opponent up for that and if I can't do it I become extremely flustered and ineffective. it's a dependable and often inescapable checkmate but you always feel real smart when you manage to do something tricky with a bishop and a knight
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
staplegun posted:chess boxing is a pretty cool concept because if you're losing the game you can still win by giving your opponent a severe concussion. its a real mystery
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
I play chess but have to admit Go is the better game because there's no Nuclear Tesuji (Throwing the Board Against the Wall Denting the Wall and the Board Prior to Uppercutting Your Opponent) in chess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
ANIME IS BLOOD posted:it's a dependable and often inescapable checkmate but you always feel real smart when you manage to do something tricky with a bishop and a knight I've never mastered the use of knights :/
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:I've never mastered the use of knights :/ A Samurai would totally destroy a Knight anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
staplegun posted:I play chess but have to admit Go is the better game because there's no Nuclear Tesuji (Throwing the Board Against the Wall Denting the Wall and the Board Prior to Uppercutting Your Opponent) in chess. In ancient China, interfering with a game of Go was a capital offense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 13:59 |
|
|
satanic splash-back posted:A Samurai would totally destroy a Knight anyway. They should do east vs. west chess where each side has different but balanced move sets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2016 15:51
|
|