>not a single balance update since the 8th century
You're just begging AnarchyChess to correct you.
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
>not a single balance update since the 8th century
You're just begging AnarchyChess to correct you.
They're going to tell me to google something. I can feel it.
You should only be Googling things en passant, and not hang around too long.
I’ll show myself out.
OK, I looked it up on Wikipedia. The bishop and queen were the last to have their moves set changed to the modern form in the 15th or 16th century. But even since then there have been some tweaks, such as the 3 move and 50 move rules for draws, and the orientation of the board. So you could maybe argue no balancing since the 16th century, and only a few bug fixes after that.
Yeah, chess was really hard when the board had to be vertical. Horizontal orientation was a huge improvement to the player experience.
Castle was put in place around the 17th century, and en passant wasn't put into the rules until 1880. Both were balance issues being solved.
White is OP, known issue since 1889 and devs haven't addressed it. Dead game
Possible quick fix: Switch from turn-based to real time mode
Ah, there was a rule update just "recently" (1971). You could technically castle across the vertical board if you promoted to rook.
Castling itself (as a single move) is a 17th century balance update. Before that it was done as separate moves. But the only reason castling became a thing was because the Queen and Bishop were buffed in the 15th century allowing them to threaten more spaces. This made it more advantageous to fortify the king’s position than to have him flee.
O-O-O-O-O-O#
Jesus christ, lol
The Picard Maneuver of checkmates if I've ever seen one
PIcard tried to pull some shit and the dog knocked the pieces over in frustration, I'm certain
Picard opened with the Amar: Krazy Kat variation and the dog couldn't help himself.
(I had no idea this opening existed. I just googled, assuming there had to be one with "cat" in the name)
Google ~~en passant~~ vertical castling
But bots have become a big problem for this game recently.
Funny story time:
I had someone cheat against me the other day (without me realizing it, because I don't have the game sense to tell), then offer a draw in a clearly winning position. I guess they were trying to avoid detection, but I decided that I didn't want their handout, declined the draw offer, and resigned.
The system immediately flagged them as cheating and refunded my elo, so I guess all's well that ends well.
Excellent Chad loss, my man
I bet a bot can beat you at Counter Strike too if we made them as strong as possible like chess bots.
Not quite true. Before the ~15th century, the queen moved like the king and the pawns could only move 1 square from their starting square. These changes were made to make the game more exciting and less slow.
Also castling and en Passant
It doesn't get balance updates because the sides are virtually identical, it's not hard when your game design doesn't take risks
You are quite correct that an asymetrical game is much harder to balance.
However having identical sides and a symmetric playing field doesn't always guarantee a balanced game. For example, if one piece or position dominates all others it can lead to a lack of viable options and just one way to play, making the game uninteresting. You don't just want the players to have equal strength, you also want the universe of possible playing strategies to contain many different strong options.
Actually it has had balance changes. Chess clock for instance is a balance update between the players, but there's also been balancing between pieces. En passant and castling but also changing how the pieces work (for example bishop).
Despite the obvious symmetry of the game there's still a lot to balance.
Devs abandoned it, players won't
Folks over at c/AnarchyChess are feeling so triggered rn
It's ok, we're two steps past them now. I think we're safe.
Eh. My last move was to tie a ballistic missile to a pawn and roll it down a pinball machine. Their move is to keep it from hitting the bottom and exploding. That would keep them occupied for a while.
I mean it did get forked into shogi.
pawn hitbot STILL bugged after a dash action
Well, balance is quite a bit easier if everything is a mirror match. And they still fucked it up, white has the starting advantage.
Nah, staring position is zugzwang, black gets to capitalise on whites blunder in the opening.
Bruh, queen is so OP! It's BULLSHIT!
She's such a Mary Sue.
But if you wanted to turn chess into a 4X game, here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taikyoku_shogi?wprov=sfla1
"One game may be played over several long sessions and require each player to make over a thousand moves."
I got bored with chess so I started playing Shogi. It's the same thing, but different.
Rocket League is also like chess. Basically the same, just different.