Chess engines have improved a lot in recent years compared to what chess programs and computers were like perhaps 20 years ago. The basic design of a typical chess program was that it searched a limited number of moves ahead; positions were then evaluated by material and by some simple positional factors that could easily be determined by a computer program - with the positional factors not allowed to outweigh a single pawn, so the computer wouldn't do silly things if the positional program was all wrong.
Because computer programs do look a few moves ahead, the end result is that even if the positional terms in the evaluation function aren't perfect, it will still try to make moves that are in accord with better positional principles than the evaluation function embodies.
To make tactical blunders, this kind of chess program would have to be set to a very low search depth, though, so it sounds like the one you're using does not conform to this usual model.
This isn't a thread about cheating, lol.
Having played a certain amount of chess against AI opponents, I've noticed certain features and also have some questions I wonder if anyone who knows about engines can answer.
I've seen engines do really weird stuff when set to play around my level (c. 1200). Like literally suddenly giving up a queen for nothing in return, letting a bishop simply hang or moving its king out from behind pawns into the centre of the board. I can believe the hanging bishop, but the other two things I simply don't believe a human player of ~1200 ELO would do.
In a game I played today the engine foresaw a mate-in-2 that I could play, but still let me play it, so I won!
I've also noticed that engines at this level seem to neglect development and delay castling, if at all. Has anyone else noticed these things? I've no experience of playing an engine at a much higher level, so I'm wondering if the engines neglect these things then as well? I assume not.
So my questions are about what the engine will take into account when making an evaluation. When making an evaluation is the engine mainly tactical (they are tactical monsters, after all) or does it also take the following more positional/structual features into account:
- Pawn structure (incl. doubled pawns etc.)
- Development (engines often seem to neglect this at lower levels)
- Opposite-side castling and possible pawn storms
- King safety
- The bishop pair
I realise it must be very hard to get an engine to play "human-like" or to dumb it down to the level of the average patzer like me, but it can behave strangely at times.
Does anyone have any thoughts on the above? Thanks.