Hasn't needed a balance patch, roster update, or new map for hundreds of years

>He doesnt know
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairy_chess_piece
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_variants

Attached: Chess_on_an_Infinite_Plane_(starting_setup_of_pieces).png (800x870, 183K)

top kek

This, also I think FIDE implemented new time control rules recently

because someone has to go first, so you end up beating one another infinitely by swapping who starts first

What the fuck is the eagle and spikey castle

>king is the weakest piece
>queen is extremely overpowered and basically can solo the enemy
When did you realize that chess is stronk independent wymyn propaganda

>queen has a value to it and is disposable
>king is priceless, can't be given up
chess is extremely redpilled if anything

>tfw just cracked 1600 on Lichess
>tfw only been playing for 6 months

Thank you Ben Finegold and Jeremy Silman. :3

Attached: 1514520880209.png (1000x802, 30K)

This you fucktard

Timurlane created his own chess. I guess that was the Super Turbo edition of chess in his days

Imbressive based autist.

>Japanese version adds Hard Mode

Attached: shogi02.jpg (480x294, 44K)

You guys are dumb fucks who don't even play chess. Fucking Fischer made Chess 960 because he got sick of the opening memorization.

>peasants revolt
>dunsanys chess
holy keke

>turn based combat

Attached: 1461791261490.gif (187x220, 607K)

>play chess with someone online
>have a copy of chess with an AI on the hardest difficulty
>I copy my human opponents move against the AI to see the perfect move to make against them every single time

Attached: smug reddit frog.gif (425x481, 1.51M)

Fucking smart.

Its actually a good way to learn. I did this too, and before long I pretty much predict what moves the computer would make.

Queen is a mistranslation. The original meant "General".

>Hasn't needed a balance patch
>When played optimally, black can never beat white.
>Best case scenario, black forces a draw
>"Balanced"

Chess isn't a game, it is a procedure first and foremost.

>I still don't know how to play chess
Anyone know a place where i can learn it in like 20 minutes? I find this pretty embarrassing for such popular game.

Attached: 1555272137658.jpg (637x476, 38K)

There it is again. Every moronic post is accompanied by an anime girl pic.

>tfw know how to play chess but never learned checkers

>in the interest of fair play and to restrict turtling we have made the playfield smaller.

I heard google.com has excellent tutorials.

Chess isn't a solved game if that's what you're implying

>play pic related on our family's macs as a kid
>loved it, taught me chess
>years later learn there was a ds port in europe
>try it out
>the computer plays just as well and fast on the wimpy DS as it did on our much more powerful imac g3
How the fuck did they pull it off?

Attached: fritz and chesster ds.jpg (385x346, 32K)

that's not how it works though, the best bot right now, which iirc is LC0, recently went 5.5 to 4.5 against stockfish, another really good engine
the kicker is, LC0 won 2 games out of 10 as white, while SF won 1, 7 other games were draws
so we're nowhere NEAR mastering chess

>Dev was so assblassted that he calls a decisive defeat a stalemate

Attached: file.png (1098x754, 410K)

If chess had an anime girl UI like Mahjong Soul Yea Forums would be all over it

>shitter can't win with overwhelming advantage
didn't deserve the win

Wtf... Did the dev just twick the game so its a stalemate. What a faggot.

But Usagi is canon retard, it's even stated in the show, i thought it would be a good way to represent my absolute lack of intelligence

Attached: 6655555666666666666.jpg (480x360, 10K)

Why don't more women play this game? Is it the toxic fanbase?

nah. Chess is fun while you are learning it but if you understand mathematics and probability it becomes very boring very quickly. I never persued it further once I could handedly beat everyone around me though, I probably should have.

>the Go faggots haven't shown up yet
I'm scared.

It is pure math, you figure it out.

lol ltp idiot

>Fucking Fischer made Chess 960 because he got sick of the opening memorization.

Chess is still fun under 2000 ELO because most players in that range aren't turbo autists and it often pretty quickly results in both players playing their own moves instead of just following a book.

High-end chess has become an absolute snoozefest though. Becoming a titled player used to be prestigious and now it mostly shows that you're just a lifeless autist who brute forces his way through opening theory books. There are a few good grandmaster players though who actually have a more "natural" playing strength and imaginative style, like Hikaru Nakamura and Alexander Morozevich.

Attached: 1482650090669.png (1548x1468, 121K)

women can't into thinking

That's a stalemate though.
Black isn't in check, but if he moved he would put himself in check, therefore it's a stalemate.

That rule is so fucking annoying and pointless.

>Having only the king left makes victory an impossibility
>Rather than just declare the opponent with pieces left the winner, "hurr let's turn the game into an autistic game of cat and mouse where the opponent can force a draw despite being at a severe disadvantage and deserving to lose"
Retard logic

The fuck does chess have to do with math and probability? There's no randomness, are you just spouting random words to sound smart?

plenty of women play chess, there's just not enough recognition or hype, because they're overall worse than men in every single aspect and time format

Confucius says:
"never play boardgames with a person who is not in your punching range"

Not the game s fault you're too retarded to win with an overwhelming advantage.

Chess was developed over hundreds of years
And a lot of people think Chess960 is better, so maybe it will change again

If you would make so research you would find that there are thousands of different generation of varying versions of basic rule sets and allowed/disallowed moves and starting configurations and conditions.

Last major balance patch was the reverting of towering changes made in april for the pro-league, and it experiences new balance changes at least 4 times for each season.

Unless of course you play casual, but opinion of anyone that plays casual won't matter.

video games went backwards. started as completed products that didn't need anything and slowly went to being retarded shit that needs patches to work and buy dlc every week to get the "complete experience"

it's a stalemate because the king cant move, but is not in check.

>Squander your pieces
>Get to the point where you cannot win the game
>"Y-yeah well we are both equal players because my king can't move anywhere"
Fuck off commie cuck.

>Smaller.
Learn to count?

>That rule is so fucking annoying and pointless.

Stalemate is a derivative of the compulsion to move rule in chess, which actually does make sense as you shouldn't be allowed to give your turn to your opponent (in pic related, neither side wants it to be their turn). Stalemate is a derivative rule as since you can't skip your turn, and yet you have no legal moves, it causes the rules to be in a bind and the game is considered automatically drawn.

It isn't a bad rule as 90% of the time you stalemate them because you were playing carelessly. If you can't competently checkmate them with an enormous material advantage you don't deserve to win.

Attached: mutual zugzwang - chess.jpg (760x757, 385K)

you cant just pass a move nigga. if youre winning that hard keep the king in check and stop being a retard.

Behold, plebeians

Attached: file.png (300x291, 189K)

You've gotta earn your win if you want it. Sorry you can't checkmate with 2 queens against a lone king

>if you understand mathematics
you are a fucking brainlet dude

he's literally sub 500 retard.

>i can't do shit but you didn't kill me yet
>SO LETS CALL IT A DRAW
truly a game for intelligent people

Attached: d844d3177259.jpg (685x385, 60K)

Every reasonable game has a mercy rule. But not chess. The game must continue for another 10 turns while also giving the opponent and opportunity to weasel his way out of defeat. There is no way to justify the stalemate rule other than to be a contrarian. Any normal fucking person would call a situation where your king cannot make any moves without being captures the next turn a loss.

if you cant checkmate with 2 queens against a lone king, you don't deserve to win retard.

>has 2 queens against a king by himself
>lets the king not be in check for one turn

>there is no randomness
Protip: there literally is no randomness in pure math.

>play chess online
>open the move analyzer tool in another browser
>win

Attached: image.png (953x1282, 495K)

>hurrr you have 2 kings + several other pieces while also managing to clear the opponent's board but the opponent doesn't deserve to lose if the king can't make a valid move

Attached: 1528662865598.jpg (381x353, 39K)

Because chessers aren't petulant manbabies like gamers are.

Games are guided procedures, dumbass

These guys know what's up. Also why more people are pushing more speed chees timing since classical is a snoozefest where any autist can find the right moves. The last 2 world championships came down to the speed chees tie breakers anyway, so might as well skip the boring shit and get right to it.

>allowing the king to get in a position to not be able to make a valid move
that's your fault retard

chessers are also constantly being beaten by fucking calculators

Neural networks aren’t calculators

In that situation stalemate can only be caused by the person who is ahead. It is totally their fault for not mating

Yes there is, how else would we be able to test for the absence of it

The element of Games Theory is largely absent from chess though since it is a solved formula. They pair opponents together based on skill so if you ever try to play your opponent instead of the game they will instantly know because you aren't doing the mathematically correct move at any given time. The "play" of it is off. There is zero hidden information and the win-state is defined and immutable.
A game is played by humans
A procedure is compiled by machines.
There is a functional difference and I pity you if you don't see it.

Facing one opponent at a time, how quaint.

Attached: nerd4way.jpg (500x500, 49K)

>The allies didn't actually win World War 2 because Hitler was surrounded and couldn't make any valid moves!

War is not chess retard

yes they are, but calculators aren't neural networks.

By deliberately making bad equations to "fix."
2+2 will always equal 4. The definition of each component of the equation is defined and never imaginary when dealing with chess.
There can be when dealing with the opponent, but that is a different quandary when dealing with chess.

On the contrary, game theory only has little interest in chess because it has been “solved.” This is like saying that 5+5=10 isn’t “real math” because the equation has been solved and is uninteresting

>my opponent can't make a valid move
>somehow this is my problem and i can't win the game because of that
5 MILLENNIUMS OF GAME DESIGN

Watched the world championship for this. Was an interesting experience, but the scoring feels tacky. Checkmates seem to worth enough to make it irrelevant though.

Also neat how they were smart enough to anonymize the players, so people don't just dogpile the series leader.

Can you explain the picture?

>2+2 will always equal 4
what if i count in base 3
BIOTCH

>Go first
>Win
Lol

Games Theory is primarily focused on how to properly interact in a scenario with no actual given way being "the best."
Chess has a definite best move to play at any given time for every possible configuration of the board.
You can't "play wrong" and win in chess ever. Unless you are playing against someone on such a different (and lower) skill level than you that there wasn't really a "game" being played in the first place.

yes because you didnt put him in check. If hes in check, then moves out of check, you put him back in check. The person ahead did not put him back in check, so he got into a spot to force a stalemate. The person ahead fucked up by not keeping the king in check.

Then you are from south africa and I just tell you to wait til tomorrow and your brain fries because you have no concept of the future.

What's the point of a rule like this?

Dota can be played by bots and beat pros, all FPS can be played by bots and beat pros.

I bet all competitive games can be played by bots and beat the best players in those games.

>white has the perfect chance to do ye old shuffle the King to the edge of the board with checks into an inevitable checkmate since he has two queens
>instead forces a draw
Okay, now this is epic.

>since classical is a snoozefest where any autist can find the right moves.

I wouldn't say that's true at all. If you've broken from the book theory, playing slow, positional chess is very, very hard and mentally draining when you have long time controls as you're trying to extend your ideas out 5, 6, 7 moves ahead.

The issue isn't that it's inherently easy to find the right moves, it's rather that they're deliberately choosing only "safe" moves and playing for a draw. The concept of playing for a draw is abhorrent to begin with, and yet this mentality totally dominates high-end chess in the current era so all of the games are boring because they refuse to take any risks whatsoever. I think slow chess is the more interesting and fun way to play, but the problem is with the players being cowards who only care about protecting their Elo rating and not actually having fun (or winning).

That's one reason why Fischer was such a great player, as he loathed drawing and played to win as both white AND black. The main reason he forfeited to world championship title in 1975 was specifically because he wanted to force slow chess to be interesting by making draws not count, so that they would actually try to play crazy, wild chess and go for wins. His conditions:
>The match continues until one player wins 10 games, draws not counting.
>No limit to the total number of games played.
>In case of a 9–9 score, the champion (Fischer) retains the title, and the prize fund is split equally.
All reasonable to me, but FIDE did not see it that way.

Attached: Fischer_on_communism.jpg (850x400, 76K)

bots do not follow the same rules as human players do
they are basically cheating but trying to be subtle about it
so what you said doesn't apply

Why did Battle Chess never catch on. I don't mean in like online championships or anything but just in general as an amusing game?

youtube.com/watch?v=o6HYbQCRwgk

youtube.com/watch?v=LpSfOBXX1Zs

Why are they cheating?

It's too much to focus on for me. It is interesting but I honestly just can't follow everything at the beginning.

Because casuals play it for a bit and have fun while autismos who in take Chess seriously want as clean and efficient design as possible

youtube.com/watch?v=LpSfOBXX1Zs

Was black a human player or a bot?

they are "inside" the game and have access to information human players do not
for example:
bots in FPS games always know where you are, but pretend not to, to give you illusion of playing with a human
you could easily program a bot that just snipes you across the map when it detects that one pixel of your character is not behind an obstacle

I thought everyone played chess 960 these days ?

Not that kind of bot you boomer retard, there are bots that literally only take the same info as humans and win.

to filter out shitters like you

source? because that sounds like a load of bullshit

Not him but a chess bot isn't the same as a bot in an FPS or any kind of game like that, by far.

The only reason you would want to play 19 games of chess against a single person is if you had a confidence that you could break the opponents thinking before they could do it to you. You only want to beat the person and not the game at that point.
Cowardice to claim you want it for fairness. The man was a God in most respects though.

>autochess
>balance patches on a daily basis

This stalemate situation is actually brilliant, emergent gameplay. It gives the losing player the opportunity to end the game in a draw if he maneuvers his king correctly, so long as his opponent gets complacent.

>playing chess in chess club and your opponent makes two moves but you have no proof he was cheating and he ends up winning

>not being able to replicate every single move from the beginning and being able to do it backwards from where the current state of the game was
you deserved to lose.

I've never really played chess seriously but it looks fun and I'd like to get started. Is there a good beginning point or something I should look into?

>get outplayed
>be a sore loser and call it a draw
>call everyone else a shitter
no wonder you chesstards are bullied at school

>your opponent is doing exactly the same
>both of you are just slaves of AI's playing against each other

Cyberpunk happening right now

>I've never really played chess seriously but it looks fun and I'd like to get started. Is there a good beginning point or something I should look into?

Study Paul Morphy games. The "Opera Game" is the most instructive for beginning players.
youtube.com/watch?v=MKvUQpQWie0

lichess.org/Tvzo2Jw6
lichess.org/Tvzo2Jw6
lichess.org/Tvzo2Jw6

Click the link to play a game against me. If you're a beginner to chess I'm likely noticeably stronger than you, but it can be fun anyway.

Attached: Paul-Morphy.jpg (651x405, 94K)

what you said is literally how stock market works nowadays

Thanks user, I'll look into it. I'd try playing you but I'm currently at work. Appreciate it either way

is this is a joke? the chess rules have been changed many times in the last "hundreds of years"

>the other player's face when

Attached: akagi.jpg (259x195, 8K)

There's no glitches or exploits in real life, OP

>perfect information games
big yawn

You know the rule exists, play around it and win. Who really got outplayed there? It's like crying about the popular vote.

>Win
>Lol you don't "deserve" for it to count as a win. Draw!

lichess.org/QLilyP6s

No it was probably because some noble got butthurt after losing a few centuries ago and made up the rule.

>Opponent makes several mistakes to the point of victory being impossible
>Make one mistake with your established lead
>Draw
Great rule

Attached: 59914459_347133729483906_413839042654225395_n.jpg (600x624, 65K)

>female character is an OP mary sue

I'm supposed to believe this queen can beat up knights and castles. Who writes this shit?

genius

Attached: big board.png (767x593, 69K)

>win
this is where you are wrong.

its a general, not a queen. Queen was a transcription error.

It really is. It makes even the losing side have a clear objective to strife for instead of making the match a boring faceroll from the moment one side gains slight advantage.
Stop being a shitter.

how fucking assblasted one person can be from a single draw lmao

Chess is literally an unbalanced game. Look up first-move advantage.

>thinking its a single draw
This nibba has grasped defeat (draws) from the mouth of victory countless times. You can just tell from how salty they are. This shit happens to them all the time and they have themselves to blame for it each and every time.

Have there ever been real attempts to balance the first move advantage?
I know they would all get shot down by purists but has anything even remotely reasonable ever been proposed?

The "queen" piece was originally meant to represent the power behind the throne. Look up "grey eminence".

I refer to my pawns around my queen as my camarilla when playing and just move them like rooks.
Everyone complains about it but they can't stop me.

>not modding your chessboard to have exploding pawns, rideable knights, or rooks that can teleport

c5

Whoever clicked this is the biggest sore loser I have ever seen. Holy shit.

Attached: 1498230992338.png (568x590, 233K)

This retard plays 15+15, so whenever he makes a move he gets 15 seconds back on the clock.
I had him down to 3 minutes even with that. What a fucking retard.

Attached: 1556399664433.gif (480x480, 543K)

>Have there ever been real attempts to balance the first move advantage?

It's been balanced for centuries. You just play an equal number of games as both white and black. That's how tournaments are balanced so no one gets unfair advantages.

Attached: 1492156545657.jpg (504x415, 20K)

this guy deserves to take the draw. why the fuck would you play queen B5? B4 is checkmate

there are different minor rules you can play by though

sounds like the most reasonable way to do it. This way doesn't change the actual game in any way. What is the standard best of?
Chess seems like autist central, in the best way possible.

I remember my uncle teaching me chess when I was a young child. The first time I beat him he was very happy. I don't care if he was lowing his game to let me win, I seized the win and he was pleased.
I miss him alot.

based and Spockpilled

Attached: tos 3d chess.png (1280x956, 1.72M)

Stalemates can be bullshit sometimes, but if you can't easily checkmate a lone king with 2 queens a bishop and a knight then you don't deserve a stalemate, you deserve a fucking loss.

Man how do you actually get fucking good at chess?

based anti-anime rubbitor

Attached: 1555020960945.gif (500x454, 165K)

Memorizing every single opening sequence will take you very far.

if you that outnumbered you don't deserve a draw faggot

After all these years, I still don't know how the fuck do horses work. Do they move on their own at the battle phase or do you have to move them after moving with a soldier? I know you can use them to attack the opposing forts somehow, but there really is no consistency in how they move.

Attached: LuigiSweatDrop.png (354x351, 142K)

>What is the standard best of?

10-12 seems to be pretty normal now. Historically, grandmaster tournaments sometimes had 30 round matches, although that's somewhat rare today.

The 1972 World Championship between Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky was 24 rounds, for example (ended early due to Fischer winning a majority by game 21).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1972

Meanwhile, the 2018 World Chess Championship between Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana was only 12 rounds (and was boring as shit as it ended in 12 consecutive draws and went into a rapid chess tiebreaker).

Attached: Boris-Spassky-vs-Bobby-Fischer-Aug-31-1972.jpg (620x411, 39K)

I am pretty sure a lot of people do this.

>20 minutes
lol

they move in an L shape

lichess.org/Tvzo2Jw6/white

youtube.com/watch?v=U1UtRnGn5hc

Attached: Efim_Geller_1973.jpg (800x963, 224K)

The knight is a nuckelavee, its easier on the brain that way.

Are the things I've heard about Bobby Fischer true? You know what I'm talking about.

Yes, he was very anti-Semitic and public about it, despite being Jewish himself.

i like his vids but he is so full of himself and his constant trump hate is super annoying, i dont even like trump myself but it pisses me off he keeps lecturing 10 year old kids with constant orange man bad propaganda, fucking pathetic

That sounds completely fucking useless lol. Can't you use the infantry to mount them so that they go straight?

He grew to despise the game of chess, yes. He wanted it to be a game of strategy, rather than nothing but memorization and pattern recognition.

how could it be a game about strategy at the point he was playing though? I'd admire his want, but there just isn't any way to do it without fundamentally changing the people playing, which clearly didn't want it to change.

I know nothing about chess aside from the basic rules so I don't know what goes on at the upper echelon of it all.

>Are the things I've heard about Bobby Fischer true? You know what I'm talking about.

Well he was the greatest chess player of all time and he was also openly anti-Semitic and anti-communist who pretty much had no filter on anything he said. His games are like watching supercomputers play against humans.

Here is a game of his as a 13 year old playing against International Master Donald Byrne, which is called the "Game of the Century" by chess enthusiasts.

youtube.com/watch?v=wzXjiyP2N1U

Attached: Fischer on Kasparov.jpg (850x400, 89K)

I mean when everything else already goes straight it's nice to have something that can move the way the knight does.
also, it's a knight, not just horse. It's already mounted.

But that's wrong.
The word was originally "Vizier", not general

Source? Like, do they actually analyze things based on image and sound processing alone taken from an external camera and don't ever look into the internal parameters of the game?

its a nuckelavee

His leftist politics piss me off because he has to include it constantly, but I like his lectures as he actually teaches (mostly positional) chess theory in a way that's entertaining and understandable.

it's a knight you nerd

Thanks for proving you were down to 2 minutes in a 15 minute game where you get 15 seconds each time you move.

Hopefully not.
Don't get me wrong chess is a beautiful game, but at the most optimal level who ever plays first or whatever usually wins.
It's just so figured out... also there's not tech skill...
SC broodwar and melee are the closest we have.

I don't see it

melee already reached that point

kind of like how For Honor blows at higher levels because the first person who throws and actual attack gets parried and punished into oblivion so it's just two guy staring at each other feinting each other to death

M8 the engine puts you at dead lost by move 10.

>GOAT quits the game because he thinks it is trash