Some of the people I play at school use a defense they call "the death wall". It looks like this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The objective of this is to be able to capture anything that tries to attack. I think this is a mistake. I think openings should be offensive. I think it is much better to be the first one to attack.

The "Death Wall" will be the death of anyone who employs it.  Look at all those dark square weaknesses.

 I think this is a mistake.

 

Aye. White hasn't developed any pieces. A more advanced and sound "death wall" opening is called the Hedgehog:

 

http://www.angelfire.com/nf/chess/Hedgehog.html

 

I think it is much better to be the first one to attack.

 

I think it's better to be the first player to control the center (with pieces or pawns) and develop your pieces. Then you get a strong middlegame attack.

This is not meant to be insulting, but I used to like that setup when I was about 6 years old. The problem, as pointed out is all those weak dark squares! There is a setup called the "Stonewall" that puts the 4 central pawns on all the same color, and also keeps a watchful eye using a knight and bishop on the important weak squares.

 

Also, the pawns on the backrow in this setup are fairly defenseless. Here is a game I played here at chess.com where my opponent tried a setup like what you have shown.

What a funny game.

It would take a real fool to not realize that the "death wall" is really a "death trap"

Ok, I admit the white player is much lower rated, but a new player can learn some important lessons from his mistakes! Too many pawn moves, giving up his only developed piece and good bishop on move 7, continuing to put all his pawns on the color of his remaining bishop, not trying to trade off the e4 knight with Nd2, and of course, all the hanging pawns. And on topic to the thread, the defects of the pawn structure that allow black to twirl his knight around, effortlessly winning 3 pawns, while white can hardly untangle himself behind his awkward fortress.

Yes, quite instructive. I meant it was funny how thoroughly you refuted his setup.

Bd3 is the correct placement for the bishop in a stonewall, not outside the "wall". 

"I think it's better to be the first player to control the center (with pieces or pawns) and develop your pieces. Then you get a strong middlegame attack"

I think it is best to be the first player to control all the spaces around your enemy's king! But this opening is not one of the best ways of achieving that. Although a select few masters like to play defense (and have the skills to pull it off), the vast majority would prefer to be attacking. After all, defending means a chance that one will lose, whereas attacking means a chance that one will win...

Sprite wrote: Bd3 is the correct placement for the bishop in a stonewall, not outside the "wall". 

---

 I don't think anyone in this thread suggested the light squared bishop go outside white's stonewall setup. Probably because there is no such thing as inside or outside a dark squared wall for a light squared bishop.

I used to play it when I was like 4 and loved to (what was that word again???)