Does anyone play Chess?

spartak · December 26, 2002, 13:46

Or is this forum only for computer games?

I like Chess but an exceedingly rustly and quite crap. Does anyone fancy a PBEM game? PM me if you do...

CapitanGarlic · December 26, 2002, 14:46

I like chess, but I suck at it.

Dis · December 26, 2002, 15:45

ditto. My brain is no computer. I have trouble planning several moves ahead. Although I seem to be able to do it for civilization a little bit better. But that is because the unit movements are more linear and easier to picture in my head.

Smash · December 26, 2002, 16:59

Julius Brenzaida is the Apolyton Chess Champion so yes we have played chess here before.He crushed me like a bug 3 separate times as well as several others.Strong player

Modern "correspondence" chess is very popular these days with numerous sites running.

2 good ones are

Stan's NetChess

RedHot Pawn

Both allow play for free and you can play when you want/can.10 moves a day or 1 move a week..doesn't matter.

DrSpike · December 26, 2002, 19:39

I have some redhotpawn games going.......though if you spend much time playing I strongly recommend you check out ICC (Internet Chess Club), of which I was a member when I played a lot.

Thrawn05 · December 26, 2002, 23:10

I play, but I suck in the internet because everyone wants to play 15 second blitz games.

I also suck against the computer, but then, most people I hear get creamed by K-Chess Elite.

Seneca · December 26, 2002, 23:18

I like the grand tactical sweep, but come unstuck on little things, like leaving pieces exposed. Why can't players appreciate the genius of my rook sacrifice for what it is? Can't they just overlook the fact that they can mate me in thred? - it's so pedantic to go through with it, it really is.

loinburger · December 27, 2002, 00:02

I used to play quite often, but haven't played a serious game in about eight years (though I've played, and trounced, my stuck-up ass of a cousin several times in the interim, just for shits and giggles). The problem that I eventually encountered in competitive play was that other players would memorize a slew of openings and gambits, and they would beat me as a result. The only way that I could effectively counter this "memorize and regurgitate" style of play was to do my own memorization and regurgitation, but the idea of memorizing the first twenty-odd moves of a game struck me as being both cheap and boring (and altogether not very fun). So, I stopped playing competitively, and haven't actively sought non-competitive games (except when visiting my cousin) -- I'm a bit rusty at the moment, and intend to stay that way.

rwprice · December 27, 2002, 00:36

If you're interested, I'd love to have a discussion pitting chess against other PC strategy games. Before you dismiss the idea, hear me out. No, I don't want to get into the "chess is better because...", or "Civ is better because...", nor do I want a debate of which game is more complex.

Instead, I'd like to hear your own personal opinions of the two. Why do you favor one over the other? If you play both types of games, what is it about chess that keeps bringing you back, and what does chess lack that you find in other PC strategy games?

I often find when I play PC strategy games that many of them are thinly-veiled versions of chess with many more pieces and possible moves. So I end up wondering why I don't just play chess. But something inside won't let me completely turn away from the PC games.

Anyway, let's talk about what we love and hate in comparing these two types of games.

Fire away!

loinburger · December 27, 2002, 01:24

They both have the "memorize and regurgitate" weakness to some degree or another, IMO. In some regards TBS games are less susceptible to this problem than chess (since TBS games have semi-random starting configurations, e.g. random maps), but in other regards they're much more susceptible to the problem since there are fewer variables to a TBS game than to a chess game (in chess a slight change in board configuration can result in an entirely different game scenario, whereas a TBS is usually much more resistant to such "chaotic" game shifts -- a stack of 7 tanks is pretty much the same as a stack of 6 tanks, a city of 20 pop is pretty much the same as a city with 21 pop, etc.), so a much shorter look-ahead is required.

Another major difference is that most TBS games have some probabilistic factors involved ("Will the enemy's archers destroy my bombers?"), while chess does not (a pawn always attacks the same board locations, and it always instantly kills the piece at that location).

Dis · December 27, 2002, 03:04

Well I kind of illustrated why I like TBS games better. The linear movement makes it much, much easier to plan moves ahead. Something I cannot do so well with chess.

Plus controlling an army, and an empire is just cool.

DrSpike · December 27, 2002, 07:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05
I play, but I suck in the internet because everyone wants to play 15 second blitz games.

An element of truth perhaps, but as in the SP/MP thread you are overstating the case. At ICC for example (the most popular online chess server) there are rooms for players that want to play 90 minute games etc, and they are usually populated. As with your quake comments you just have to look to see why they are not true.

DrSpike · December 27, 2002, 07:43

Quote:

Originally posted by loinburger
The problem that I eventually encountered in competitive play was that other players would memorize a slew of openings and gambits, and they would beat me as a result. The only way that I could effectively counter this "memorize and regurgitate" style of play was to do my own memorization and regurgitation, but the idea of memorizing the first twenty-odd moves of a game struck me as being both cheap and boring (and altogether not very fun).

This is a common gripe, and not without reason, because at some levels it is annoying. However up till ELO 2000 at least openings are largely irrelevant, since the players are not skilled enough to retain an opening advantage throughout the game.

After reaching this level my approach was to learn some openings that weren't razor sharp, where strategic motifs were more important than memorising streams of moves. For example you have to avoid the open sicilian.....you should play the closed if you wish to avoid cutthroat theory. With a little effort you can build a repertoire that doesn't require familiarity with umpteen lines.

Thrawn05 · December 27, 2002, 10:37

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike

An element of truth perhaps, but as in the SP/MP thread you are overstating the case. At ICC for example (the most popular online chess server) there are rooms for players that want to play 90 minute games etc, and they are usually populated. As with your quake comments you just have to look to see why they are not true.

Just like there will always be people hateing whatever either a democrate or republication is saying, there will always people who will blindly back up MP.

I'm not NEVER overstating my case in MP. I have been to IGN and Chess.net, and all that everyone wants to do is play 15 second blitze games.

Thrawn05 · December 27, 2002, 10:42

Quote:

Originally posted by loinburger
I'm a bit rusty at the moment, and intend to stay that way.

I'll drink to that!

rwprice · December 27, 2002, 12:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
Well I kind of illustrated why I like TBS games better. The linear movement makes it much, much easier to plan moves ahead. Something I cannot do so well with chess.

Plus controlling an army, and an empire is just cool.

In a nutshell, I think you've hit the nail on the head. I find that, even though Chess may technically be less complex, the depth of thinking required to play is much greater than in other TBS games. It takes more mental effort to play chess, IMHO. loinburger also pointed out one key difference: that a single move has much less effect in TBS games than it does in chess. One wrong move in chess and you've changed the entire game. In most TBS games, however, you can often recover from a bad decision fairly easily.

The other point you made, the coolness factor, is one that I find undeniable. It's the ony way I can explain why I would come back to games that depend on a poor AI. At least the AI for a chess program won't cheat and make illegal moves, while many TBS games can be caught "cheating". The one thing that chess will never have is the atmosphere of these other games: while playing chess you aren't likely to lose yourself and think you're the king.

In a TBS game, however, you get caught up the "world" of the game. That's the draw of those games, don't you think?

Traianvs · December 27, 2002, 12:43

I love playing chess but I don't often play it against other people because it is hard to find someone who knows how to play, and when I do know a friend (or my dad

) or someone that does know how to play, I usually beat 'em quite easily, not because I'm good, but simply because they make stupid mistakes

Strategy games have a nicer athmosphere, while chess is always the same basic game, I like something else every once in a while...(like the additional scenarios in civ2 and Stronghold!)

I also don't think much thought is needed when playing these games, you only need either large numbers or simply a strategy (hence the name Strategy games) with which you can build up your army as quick as possible...

I know how to play chess fairly well, but in civ2 i was never too great (deity was just that bit too difficult, too much unrest => democracy impossible) simply because i didn't follow a strategy, like in the order of which advancements to pursue for example.

Strategy also has other aspects (blood,...) or diplomacy (bribing) that make me want to play it again.

I do think that the computer cheats sometimes though.. when I have made myself a nice setup he just crumbles it with a few moves that crush me

(once i'm starting to lose a game against the computer, i can never recover...humans make mistakes, a computer doesn't, that's why i just lurrrve human opponents

)

DrSpike · December 27, 2002, 19:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Thrawn05

Just like there will always be people hateing whatever either a democrate or republication is saying, there will always people who will blindly back up MP.

I'm not NEVER overstating my case in MP. I have been to IGN and Chess.net, and all that everyone wants to do is play 15 second blitze games.

No, I speak from much experience with over 10 MP games.......it seems you are the one that speaks from the experience of 5 minutes of trying and then getting frustrated.

More and more people are getting into MP these days.......if it's not your scene fine, not everybody enjoys games the same way.....but your reasons are critical; as long as you state things that are manifestly untrue it is my duty to point that out.

Heresson · January 3, 2003, 19:47

My aunt was chess master of my city several times.
I'm not.
But I have Fritz.

War4ever · January 3, 2003, 21:29

i love chess..have had a chess board for years...but anyone with any real skill will murder me too

Thrawn05 · January 3, 2003, 21:53

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike

No, I speak from much experience with over 10 MP games.......it seems you are the one that speaks from the experience of 5 minutes of trying and then getting frustrated.

More and more people are getting into MP these days.......if it's not your scene fine, not everybody enjoys games the same way.....but your reasons are critical; as long as you state things that are manifestly untrue it is my duty to point that out.

First off, experience means nothing to me, no offense.

I don't get frustrated, I get bored. Not because I keep losing or keep winning but it just becomes tiring very quickly.

Are you saying that I spend my time here at Apolyton lying to my teeth? I think I have better things to do then that.

BTW, I have played 11 games with MP.

No hard feelings.

Kropotkin · January 4, 2003, 07:31

Thank MTV for the attention span of a fruit fly!

I like the game and got a board on the shelfs but most people don't seem to have the mental strenght to handle it these day in age. I played a lot in the school library when I was a young teenager. Even so I'm not good. I kick my girlfriends ass from time to time as she's no opposition. That's a sweet revenge for the few times she fools me into playing Starcraft.

DrSpike · January 4, 2003, 10:03

Thrawn: No offense here either.

However I have just fired up icc, and looked at the games being offered. There are many blitz games, but many of the good players are offering 60 or 90 minute games. It just isn't true that you can't get longer games online......you just need to look.

I also fired up Quake........there are lots of people on fast servers, none of which are cheats.

Sure you may keep losing when you start playing a MP game. If that is your gripe you just need to stick with it until you can compete.

Thrawn05 · January 4, 2003, 19:20

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
Thrawn: No offense here either.

However I have just fired up icc, and looked at the games being offered. There are many blitz games, but many of the good players are offering 60 or 90 minute games. It just isn't true that you can't get longer games online......you just need to look.

I also fired up Quake........there are lots of people on fast servers, none of which are cheats.

Sure you may keep losing when you start playing a MP game. If that is your gripe you just need to stick with it until you can compete.

perhaps at icc, but Chess.net is nothing but blitz games.

As for Q3, I looked at it and the best game ping wise is 300, and it only had Bitterman, TankJr and Grunt in Nightmare mod and no one else. Now, I don't object playing against bots, but I rather do it while not online since my gun will fire quicker.

I did find one that some people that 380 ping, but it was unplayable since it took too long to fire my plasma gun and so let's just say Crash could do better.

I'll make a deal with you, I will not mention how much I don't like MP in another thread, other then saying somthing to the effect of "I said my peace in other threads.".

Sounds fair.

DrSpike · January 4, 2003, 19:58

Lol, if you don't like MP that's your prerogative. I think your insane, but that's my prerogative.

However your reasons for not liking MP aren't true, so I am just making sure you are not missing out for no good reason. Download Blitzin (I think this is still the client for ICC) and check it out......I guarantee you you can play longer games of chess than blitz there.

As for Quake (slight overlap of threads here) don't use the ingame browser.......gamespy or allseeingeye are the most popular, and if you have broadband (looking at those pings you probably don't) find some servers in your country and I guarantee you you will find servers you can play on with <50 ping. Avoid personal servers....check out the big servers run by ISPs and the like, they are your best bet. If you don't have broadband you can't play FPS, but that isn't the games fault it is yours for not having a better connection.

As for RTS most popular online RTS are reasonably balanced, at least for everyone up to pro level. Do persevere, it is tricky I know, but when it works you will wonder why you ever played AI at all.

Dauphin · January 4, 2003, 20:14

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
I have some redhotpawn games going

Givent the obvious play on words, are the pieces graphically represented by famous pornstars?

DrSpike · January 4, 2003, 20:18

I would not be surprised if someone has designed a custom set to that effect.

Thrawn05 · January 6, 2003, 22:19

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
Lol, if you don't like MP that's your prerogative. I think your insane, but that's my prerogative.

However your reasons for not liking MP aren't true, so I am just making sure you are not missing out for no good reason. Download Blitzin (I think this is still the client for ICC) and check it out......I guarantee you you can play longer games of chess than blitz there.

As for Quake (slight overlap of threads here) don't use the ingame browser.......gamespy or allseeingeye are the most popular, and if you have broadband (looking at those pings you probably don't) find some servers in your country and I guarantee you you will find servers you can play on with <50 ping. Avoid personal servers....check out the big servers run by ISPs and the like, they are your best bet. If you don't have broadband you can't play FPS, but that isn't the games fault it is yours for not having a better connection.

As for RTS most popular online RTS are reasonably balanced, at least for everyone up to pro level. Do persevere, it is tricky I know, but when it works you will wonder why you ever played AI at all.

I'll take your suggestions into consideration, but after 5 years of trying to prove myself wrong I'm stuck where i am.

It's not my fault that I'm stuck with dial-up, but blame that on the cable company here. I also tried playing Half Life on my friend's College cable connection, and yes there was no lag, but again, boreing.

PS: I'm boycotting Gamespy because of the Fileplanet monopoly, but that's another issue for another thread.

General Announcement:
See people, you can disagree with someone else and still be gentlemenly about it.

loinburger · January 6, 2003, 22:43

Online gaming is one of the best things to do when you've been drinking heavily, particularly Half-Life: TFC.

Thrawn05 · January 6, 2003, 22:47

Quote:

Originally posted by loinburger
Online gaming is one of the best things to do when you've been drinking heavily, particularly Half-Life: TFC.

So is playing as the Marine in AL|ENS v. Predator GE, particulary in the Tyrargo Director's Cut level.

Good thing Wal-Mart had a deal that you buy you game, can get a free pair of underware in the store.