Testing Rushing Roulette / King Survival

Okay played 2 games, tied 1-1

I will be marking if anyone plays against me than once in the upcoming forum post I will be making

yea ranters are a lot more fun in this position

I will test later this week using ranters, but for now I have 35 games or so for Randos and I want to see if the mods like it or not.

Also, I have 2 possible names for the variant: Rushing Roulette, and King Survival

i hav no time to test anythingggg

This is a preview of what I will be submitting to the mods, hope everyone likes this:

Rushing Roulette/King Survival: The goal of this variant is to take as many pieces as possible before your king is taken by the immune queens!

Ideas for variant of variant...: Use different bots (@boxjellyfishchess suggested using ranters) ; Make board smaller to increase intensity and chance of being taken by queen.

Note: This does not have to be WOF, as it might take too long, but I want this to at least be considered for a set casual position that everyone can use. 

Time Control: Bullet, 30 Seconds.

Type: Casual-Variant

Rules: Capture the King, 2-Player, QRBK (although this has no effect on gameplay)

If anyone has the time, it was also be really helpful if this variant can be set up and played by more people. And if someone has time over the next 22 hours, I can probably submit the position to be reviewed by the mods after that time.

im pretty sure i played this 3 times with someone different than ChessMasterGS

Note: I do not recommend playing against Comfuters; they almost never take the pieces and easily lose because you can just claim. Play against Randos instead. 

@hypno56729 

Thanks!

I played a guy without a pfp

20 hours until I can submit variant

Ranters are comfuters that play the "best" move half of the time and the "worst" move half of the time (the comfuter engine is pretty weak, so most likely they will not be the absolute best/worst moves).

If you do plan on using ranters, you must test 15 more games with them.*

What do you mean by comment #30? FYI you cannot use any bots in test games. If you meant just in general, then sure ig but why not play against other humans? Also, comfuters are far stronger than randos; they are pretty bad, but randobots literally play randomly. Maybe comfuters are not programmed to recognize dead piece points? Even then, it would behave similarly to a randobot.

*Random Tangential Monologue:

For the record, I think the 15-game limit requiring all games to have the same position makes absolutely no sense. It was introduced in the hope that it would make position authors spend more effort on their position and ideally try to optimize it before submitting it for review. The number of variants that were piece-spam dropped noticeably. However, there was also a considerable decline in editing one's position. I have assisted in testing many custom positions over the past year (I mean playing test games, not CGA testing); people were much more open to fixing small errors in their variants before the game limit was increased to 15. If an error is found, creators now tend to submit them anyway, preferring to try an inferior version than play 15 more games. In addition, absolutely no one tried to fix declined games after the limit was imposed, which was not uncommon before. Only one creator has done much position-improving after the 15-game limit, and they often had 50+ games for a position anyway. It makes sense that creators should put work into their positions, but why should they be punished for trying to improve their variant? I propose a solution: keep the 15-game limit, but including other versions of the position (obviously there isn't an exact algorithm to determine whether a position counts as a different version of another position. This might be the biggest issue with this idea, but imo it's pretty easy to determine this when actually looking at the positions in question), with a 5-game limit for the exact position (screenshots for all). This makes a lot more sense than going back to the 5-game limit since I think it is very important to reward optimizing one's position.

Great essay lol

But if you were wondering I'm currently at about 10 different players and 50 games

Also Ranters seem like a good idea, but 50% seems a little too overkill for a bullet game, maybe if this variant is approved I'll do another round of testing. Ranters might also be better for WOF 

If anyone plays a game AFTER I post this message (I have recorded all previous games), please feel free to drop it in this forum so that I can put it in my forum post later this week when I request for this to be added.

This will always be WOF. Doesn't really make sense to have a luck-based NCP.

I was referring to mainly blitz/rapid games in my random paragraph, but good work on your 50 games anyway .

Thanks for the feedback. What I meant by my comment on WOF is that Ranters might be better for fast-paced games.