Value of Pieces for "Infinite Chess"
Sort:
I want to play HorribleTomato.
Feb 7, 2018
0
#103
hitthepin wrote:
They don’t lose value just because the board gets bigger. It’s just they matter less, as the other pieces become stronger.
That's literally the definition of losing value
Feb 7, 2018
0
#105
And about the hawks: the fact that it takes many moves to get into battle is related to development, which is a whole separate field from material. This is why I gave a hawk the value of 7.
Hmm... true... but it's like, if you take the bishop pair against a hawk, the bishop pair is definitely better, yet together they are considered about 6.5!
Ummm... I'll play both if it is fine with @Vickalin since he is moderating so many games. Why is it you want to play me?
Feb 7, 2018
0
#108
It’s a poetical battle of ideas! Also, according to my values, the bishop pair is worth 8 and a hawk is worth 7.
I want to play you so I can show you how good the hawks are.
Feb 8, 2018
0
#110
You can play @captaintugwash. I want to avoid getting in too many games at once.
How about me as white thematic games?
1. (3,4) H(-2,12)
A few notes before we start-
Your rapid is 1750. Mine is 1300. If I beat you...
Also, I don't think hawks are terrible, just slightly overrated. Somehow they went from 6 to 7... I'm not going to search the forums for how that happened. I, on the other hand, will prove the chancellor's worth, as they seem to be going unused in many games, and considered considerably weaker than the queen.
Of course I still see you now wrecking @Evert823 in hitthepin-captaintugwash using hawks. Knights don't get the respect they used too.
um nah I don't want to start with H(-2,12), it's not moving toward the centre. I'm wasting a tempo already.
H(1,12) and yeah. But what's the point? Just open with (3,4) and see what I do. It'll be a hawk toward the centre.
As for rating, I dunno what you're suggesting there.
HorribleTomato wrote:
Also, I don't think hawks are terrible, just slightly overrated.
I thought I was the only one who rated them so highly, certainly I've used them more than anyone else that I'm aware of.
Evert823 thinks hawks are 7... probably due to his recent encounter with you... I simply think if you know how to neutralize the hawk, it becomes slightly weaker. Also, more points are sometimes a curse. You'll see what I mean.
I have decided. Out of all the pieces in infinite chess, I am representing... THE GUARD!!! In general, this guy is underrated, even in bulldog. If you'll look at me v. AidenB1, the second his guard fell, his king side defense was immediately compromised, he started to have many soft pawns with not many defensive measures
I haven't played evert, only hitthepin and pixelbypixel.
The guard is an excellent defensive piece and will be huge in endgame, but when it comes to middlegame attacks, I can't see the guard doing much.
Feb 9, 2018
0
#119
The guard is a powerful defensive unit, but I feel like a value of 3 is appropriate for it. After all, it and the knight always attack the same number of squares, so an equal value to a knight seems reasonable.
The hawks are at most 6- so here are my new rankings
Hawk Pawn 0.5
Pawn 1
Knight 3
King 3/99999999999999999999999999999 Defending the king is sometimes costly, is the main target for pins, skewers, and forks, and simply can't defend like the guard- you have to defend it
Bishop 4
Guard 4.5 these guys hold the fort together- a guard stops any quick entrance by the chancellors and lives up to its name
Hawk 5.5 it takes three moves to get this guy into the heat of battle, the hawk can only reach 16 squares, so this piece is definately overrated
Rook 6
Chancellor 9 Once the gaurd is gone, this piece is a menace- it quickly jumps into battle with pawn picking threats- it can be used to seal the king's escape routes also. This piece is, in my opinion, underrated
queen 12 There are 2 chancellors, but only one queen!?