Are you guys seriously wasting forum space with a thread like this? Play your little game at home and don't bother the rest of us with it
Let them do what their doing. And your also wasting your own time making this post. I enjoy this type of chess. Very creative
Are you guys seriously wasting forum space with a thread like this? Play your little game at home and don't bother the rest of us with it
Let me know when the internet runs low on threads - everyone will need to start cutting back on pointless comments.
Don't know how to quote on the website in safari on an iPad, but CrunchyPebble said "this is pretty cool stuff y'all" and vickalan responded "best thing about it - no engine can play this (yet). And if your opponent makes an engine to play this game, they probably deserve to win.happy.png"
vickalan that's so true man but to make a good engine requires them to be good at it thus they don't need the engine lol
That's a good point.
All the chess programmers are trying to make better engines, to be the top engine in normal chess (already can easily defeat the best grandmasters). I think it will be a ...long.... time before they get around to any infinite version of chess.
After the other comments, I overlooked your move. I'm very sorry for taking a long time to play my move. Thanks for messaging me. My move:
8...(6,4)x(5,3)
9. (6,2)x(5,3)
If you win this game, would you like to play the winner of ulfhednar1234 vs. friedmelon? They just started a game of infinite chess too. I know it might be several weeks away (or even months). But it will be the start of a 4-way tournament, and the ultimate winner will be the "world champion" in infinite chess.
My move is:
9...(8,6)
10. B(6,1)-(5,2)
Sure, I'll play.
Sure, I'll play.
Ok, great! Here's the bracket partially filled-out, with the first two games already started.
I'll be on a vacation for a few days - when I come back I'll start a separate thread specifically to discuss tournament only. My move for now is:
10...(9,6)
11. R(10,1)-(13,1)
11...(12,12)
What are the relative values of the pieces C, H, and G?
From comments that I've seen, and my own experience this is what I think. Approximate values:
Chancellor: 9 points (About same as a queen)
Hawk: 7 points. (Note that it attacks 16 squares, which is twice as many as a knight)
Guard: 3 points. (Very similar to the value of a knight or a bishop)
Since this board is large, many people would say that sliders (like a bishop) might be worth a little more since they can travel quickly, and pieces like the guard and knight might be worth a little less.
(Other people can leave comments here too, so long as this game specifically is not discussed).
12. N(2,1)-(3,3)
12...(4,5)
From comments that I've seen, and my own experience this is what I think. Approximate values:
Chancellor: 9 points (About same as a queen)
Hawk: 7 points. (Note that it attacks 16 squares, which is twice as many as a knight)
Guard: 3 points. (Very similar to the value of a knight or a bishop)
Since this board is large, many people would say that sliders (like a bishop) might be worth a little more since they can travel quickly, and pieces like the guard and knight might be worth a little less.
(Other people can leave comments here too, so long as this game specifically is not discussed).
chancellor: ok
hawk: I suggest 5
guard: ok(normally its 4, but the board is infinte)
13. N(7,1)-(6,3)
13...N(3,6)
Are you guys seriously wasting forum space with a thread like this? Play your little game at home and don't bother the rest of us with it