For posting:
- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu)
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)
Listo de diskutaj forumoj
Vi ne rajtas afiŝi mesaĝojn en ĉi tiu forumo. La minimuma necesa nivelo de la membreco por afiŝi mesaĝojn en ĉi tiu forumo estas Brain-Peono.
Constellation36: I am not going to argue much longer about K against K end games as we mostly have the same view.
However, about repeating 3 times the same position or playing 50 moves without pawn moves, I am convinced no arbiter is allowed to interupt the game and therefore in case of a 3-times-repetition or a 50-moves-rules, there is no automatic draw...
Constellation36: come on Constellation. Even it is clear to everyone here that King Bishop against King Bishop is a draw, no arbiter would interrupt the game if both want to continue. In case of a Blitz (5 min), an illegal game would still lose the game
Constellation36: even if a player lose on time, it is still draw Hmm, yes that's right, there is absolutely no point in continuing a game with KB against KB... but the draw is not "automatic" afaik...well, anyone trying to win with time with just a king should look for another game, maybe Tennis?
grenv: maybe... I cannot tell, but I feel that surviving more than 10 moves with black is a performance (or a mistake of white). I just like quick games, but I am maybe insane
why should not be the game that short? it is not a forced move and it is not a bad move, why should it be prohibited? well, I like very short games, especially in atomic actually
dresali: I do not like your suggestion, because when someone offers draw and I do not want draw, a natural way to decline is just to keep playing, and your way would enforce to answer a question "do you want draw" before continuing, and this I do not like. I hope you understand my concept about "playing one move implies declining draw offer"
Well, this is a luck game, so a K against K endgame is not draw
A simple solution is to play your move, and, after your move have been completed, if the behemoth position is not to favorable for you, offer draw at that time, which seems fair, am I wrong? Regards
PS: it is possible to offer draw even when it is not your turn to play
compromising looks similar to ambigous, but closer to chess.
I am more seduced by one-and-half, maybe we could add that black start with +0.5 for compensation. What do you think? And of course if it is implemented, it must be implemented as a fully playable version with move sequences (as we have move sequences for backgammon, too)
nabla:even if I did manage to draw there : Recycle Chess (mangue vs. nabla) I admit it is drawish and I would find the game much more attractive with promotions.
there is almost no draw in dark chess, because you can never know if the 50 rules exist (how can you be sure your opponent did not move a pawn). So even after playing 500 moves, if your opponent still refuses to draw, you can do nothing.
Also in normal chess, KNN against K is not automatically draw, only KN against K is draw.
If you are sure there were no pawn move and no captures in the last 50 moves, you can claim a draw by Fencer, but it will be hard to prove...
Pythagoras: I like the games with balanced results. Atomic and 3-checks for example have a clear advantage for white (ok, I still like them ) . Maharadjah and Horde are simply unfair. The player starting at ambigous has certainly an advantage. Like in CHESS, and here on brainking.com, blacks wins more often than white at regular chess, probably because some feeble beginners play only with white
Statistics of won games white 119 (49.79 %) black 119 (49.79 %) Draws 1 (0.41 %)
This is great news, no clear advantage for white and almost no draw! This is what makes a game challenging. Congrats Nabla and Fencer for providing that new game
grenv: NOT 3.Nf7?? which quickly loses to 3...Qh4
does it? after 4. g3 - Qc4 5. d3 - Qxc2 6. Nxh8 it is surely better for white, is there anything better?
posting in the 8x8 forum is definitely inappropriate, sorry. but thanks socrates for your opinion. So it does not make sense, and was not possible in the earliest version. But is it legal?
promoting your last pawn would be a suicide move. In Atomic, you cannot explode your own king, so I wonder if you can extinguish yourself in extinction.
true it has been analyzed, and I know by heart how to win after 1.e4 1.d4 and 1.d3. In a shuffle antichess, I am pretty sure there are positions where game is already win before move 1.
Like atomic, the game is probably too wild to get shuffled!
What's more, I fair the extra coding and the extra rules will be to big for the players interrested in that.
I noticed that many players only play maharadjah with white for you... If you look on the "Waiting games", you have dozens of challenge with black, which is not fair.
Could they be proud about their rating? Do not they get bored?
Ok, as ughaibu said, it could be kind of beginner game for kids to learn how to move the pieces :-)