Chess on an Infinite Plane- Meta

Hi! This is my view on the theoretical best way to play infinite chess. I'll split this up into early game and middle game. I am not aware of any endgame theory, as most infinite chess games end with a swift checkmate or resignation.

Section 1: Establishing Point Values

Hawk Pawn- 70

Acts as a backline defense to prevent attacks. That's it, though. That's the only thing it does. You should be very fine with losing one of these to gain a tempo.

Pawn- 80 

You might be asking why this is lower than the standard 100. There are two reasons for this. One is that there are simply too many pawns (24, or 14 if you don't count Hawk pawns), meaning you should be fine with losing a few. The other is that pawns almost never promote and are fully defensive, acting as barriers between the sliding pieces and your side of the board. They still serve uses, but you should be fine sacrificing them for an attack.

Guard- 250

The guard blocks the areas that the knight can't in a defensive context, but can't be used for attacking at all. It's a guard for a reason, though, and you'll only be using this piece for defending unless you somehow make your way to an endgame with all pieces except pawns, guards, and knights off the board. The major problem with the guard is its inability to move across the board effeciently, but otherwise, it works great as a defensive piece. If you gain a moderate attacking advantage you still should be fine sacrificing this piece.

Knight- 255

I love the knight as a piece, but it has much less of a role in the context of infinite chess. The knight is not optimal for attacks, as Hawks and sliding pieces fill the role of an attacker much better, due to their increased versatility that is needed on an infinite board, so it'll be mostly used for defensive purposes as a barrier, just like the guard. I think it's slightly better due to it's ability to traverse the map better, but it is very interchangable. If you gain a moderate attacking advantage you still should be fine sacrificing this piece.

Bishop- 600

This is just an inferior version of the rook, as it can only cover one color of square. A benefit is it's position, as it can be utilized in early game much better than a rook, but overall it's worse. You should still be fine sacrificing t

Rook- 700

A solid piece. It just takes a while to activate, but when it does, it can be very useful, in the context of defense and attack.

Hawk- 800

Before, I thought hawks were overrated. Now, I think they deserve it. The great part about the hawk is it is a great jumping piece. It can traverse the map quickly and efficiently, and can take an aggressive stance quickly due to being able to maneuver around all the clutter in the map and keep themselves in an aggressive central position, unlike rooks and bishops, which usually have to attack from the sides to be effective. These should be primarily to attack, but have great uses defensively as well. 

Chancellor- 1100

The chancellor is a monster due to having the jumping capability of a knight, meaning it is able to get into a threatening position much faster than a rook or bishop. Having the movement of both a knight and a rook also allows it to be great when going for a checkmate. You should primarily be using these to attack.

Queen- 1400

The position of the queen allows it to flank attack extremely quickly, getting into an offensive position and threatening attack. Although she can't maneuver around enemy lines as well as a chancellor can, all of her movement options can threaten enemy pieces much better than a chancellor can, making her almost a must need for an effective checkmate attack. I might even be underestimating her value here, as it might even reach 1500-1600 ranges.

King- Infinite

This shouldn't have to be explained...

Section 2: First Moves Theory

There are two ways you can play your first moves, which I call back rank activation (my preferred method) and mid control (the classical way to play the game).

Section 2.1: Back rank activation

This is the strategy of moving your hawks, chancellors, rooks, and queens without trying to control the center. Openings which use back rank activation include hawk openings and queen retreat openings.

There are two things you want to accomplish with this strategy. Activation of hawks and activation of your queen. If you are playing back rank, the opponent will likely match you by activating hawks as well. They might even match your queen activation. 

By playing back rank activation you will force your opponent to play back rank activation as well, or else you will theoretically be one hawk up until they activate their hawks. This is more effective when you play white.

Section 2.2: Mid Control

This is the strategy of controlling the middle through fairly normal means. The setup in the middle section would likely look like a normal chess game, as people take openings like King's pawn and Sicilian defense and adapt them to an infinite chess board. If both sides commit to a mid control play, it can be tens of moves before hawks get activated. 

The main thing you want to accomplish is to establish troops in the center. This has much less benefit than in a real chess game, but it does help in terms of defense/attack.

If they start off with back rank activation you are practically forced to use back rank activation as well, or else he will theoretically be an entire hawk up until you activate your hawk. That is a main reason why back rank activation is my preferred first move, as it you can immediately decide the tempo of the game with your hawks.

I'll update this post as I my opinion and insights change about the game, as well as adding several new sections which I feel are important to the meta.

wow, that has so much to do with this topic. don't you not play chess variants?

THIRD ROUNDHOUSE KICK

sigh, what is this

Wow, I never actually saw this. Nice explanation. I think that normal pawns and hawk pawns should honestly be counted much differently, though.

That's fair, will edit.

Point values are just guidelines, though, both in regular chess and here. The nature of the position should always be considered above the point count.

there's literally 2 big things you have to consider in infinite chess, I believe.

1. How is your attack going against the opponent?

2. How well is the opponent's attacking going against you?

Positional play: am I a joke to you? 

Infinite chess: yes.

That's what's beautiful about it.

fools

what

this is dead

ah yes

sad

A lot of work has gone into this you know

yes

i know

.