>chess >Medieval Cannon Fodder Simulator: The Game Any game that doesn't allow me to HALO drop a Rook - Knight - Bishop squad over the King's compound at 0400 to double-tap him and bring about a swift end to the war, isn't a game.
I get more of a thrill out of a close match of chess than CS:GO. If we're being serious, there's too many X factors out of your control in CS:GO like a slip of the wrist or a team misplay. That's not to say they're not skills to be polished in and of themselves, but it creates room for excuses and things out of an individual's realistic control.
Chess is entirely a game of intellect and thought. Sounds like a Quentin image, but it's not. When you beat someone, someone on your level, at Chess, it feels damn good. You outsmarted them. There's the first move advantage, but if they're a good enough partner it's worth doing a set or two or three.
I used to play chess during the summer for kicks with friends. I read "Love In the Time of Cholera" recently and it's had me itching for a consistent chess opponent. If you haven't caught someone in a good play to a good checkmate in Chess, then you're really missing out. Especially over coffee in the morning. Fuck, now I'm all nostalgic.
Somebody will soon be here to argue with the work of a mathematician that hasn't bene refuted since it was put forward 65 years ago, and the many physicists and mathematicians alike who all have reached a consensus on the probable number of atoms in the universe. Calling it.
I'm probably going to get savaged for this and I hate the game but chess is more akin to RTS games like SC2 in that most of the skill is learning strategies and then counter strategies with some lesser level of adaptation needed in certain circumstances
I would say the 'skill' of both is quite overrated
How could you hate chess? Are the graphics not good enough? Has it not "aged well"? Are the controls "clunky"? Well, thanks for sharing your opinion "now that the dust has settled". "It's shit", right?
>>323141126 The thing is that it doesn't really need to. Almost all of those choices are objectively sub-optimal and branch off from an initial sub-optimal choice that the computer never needs to consider. Humans have the advantage of knowing what most of these are intuitively right now, but that's the sort of thing they're trying to program these days.
What the fuck does this even mean? Define "viable move". There are billions of moves that can be viable. Even if you purposely allow most of your pieces to be captured, this can still be made viable! I'm sorry if we're insulting your previous video games, and I'm also sorry if we're hurting your attempts to feel smart and superior by being contrarian. :-/
But there's no such thing as "sub-optimal", and you already destroyed your argument by using the word "objective". There are an infinite number of strategies. You can purposely allow your queen to be captured as part of a plan. Anything goes.
I'm studying law and rhetoric at an Ivy League school and play chess in a club recreationally. I'm not an expert at the game by any means but I've heard many conversations about the game and it's infinite number of possibilities.
The fact that there are tens of thousands of books written about the game should tell you something about its depth. You act like there's a small number of possibilities that simply need to be remembered. You're probably accustomed to playing video games and thus have been taught that everything boils down to just a few possibilities.
>>323142506 >...but then you can just abuse the AI by purposefully playing "sub-optimal" moves that it isn't programmed to react to. Actually, this is a thing when it come to human vs. human. Since most people prepare one or two or maybe three lines of a particular opening, some people with play the fourth or fifth or even sixth best move to create a nuanced position and force their opponents out of their prep.
>>323142935 >Well, yeah, a poor player. I don't know if that's necessarily true. Actually something I hear a lot of 24-2500 players complain about is that most "super GM" games are 20 moves of prep and an agreed draw.
It's hypothesised that it may be possible to solve the game. We have no way of knowing until computational technology advances far enough, and estimates as to when that will happen are just that: estimates.
>>323142363 I have a FIDE certified ELO of 2100, I don't take it too seriously but I do hope to reach 2200 at some point to get my CM title.
That being said and regardless if you believe me, you should really look into what Fischer thinks about the matter, there are many interviews/documentaries on his thoughts and they all boil down to Chess being a nearly solved game.
I don't know why you're implying that there aren't a multitude of absolutely unviable moves but that's the way it is, every GM knows the theoretically best move in the early game to everything that can happen. The only reason inferior moves are played is because of having a certain approach to the human opponent, something that doesn't work againt AI.
>>323143852 Your post reveals that you don't actually understand what 'solving' means.
A weak solution to a game means that 1) given both parties make perfect logical moves, 2) you can secure a win for one particular side, or a draw from either.
A strong solution gives an algorithm for perfect play, even if a mistake (or more) was made.
Chess has been solved for significantly smaller chessboards, with a handful of pieces. If N is the number of possible games, we're only up to the square root of N.
Given current technological progress, we will not solve chess in your children's lifetime - barring the development of quantum computing or something else that MULTIPLIES current technological capability.
>>323143912 >I have a FIDE certified ELO of 2100 I wish I was motivated enough to even get a FIDE rating. There's no chess clubs near where I live and I hate the idea of playing online. Plus I'm almost 30. It's a bummer.
Honestly, coming from someone who is FIDE certified - it's just a huge circlejerk.
The biggest benefit is having a very accurate rating of yourself, people who are truly on your level to play with and a very good ground to improve by watching slightly better players and trying to adopt their thinking patterns somewhat.
You won't have any regrets if you start playing regularly now and look for a community you can practice and grow with for years.
>>323146870 Umm, I got use my first Alekhine's gun the other week. The entire match had been completely positional; no trading at all. The when I was finally able to move after lining everything up, there was one trade of the first rook, then I moved in my Queen for the mate, so the only trades in the game were for mate.
>>323148189 Well, saying that we're both "unrated" players would be a kindness, so I'm sure any GM of any caliber would have flipped our board and kicked our asses after like move 10. ...But yeah I thought it was nice.
>ignoring the fact that there are different types of difficulty in games
Comparing a mental game like chess to all video games is retarded. Super hard games such as precision platformers like Meat Boy and even more so some crazy hard fangames of IWBTG like Kamilia 3, are super hard, but they're about training muscle memory and reaction times.
Thread replies: 67 Thread images: 7
Thread DB ID: 376083
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.