CHESSMASTER 10 CANNOT ENABLE 3D ENGINE FULL

CHESSMASTER 10 CANNOT ENABLE 3D ENGINE FULL

I set up The King with two configurations: one had full strength tactical analysis but no positional knowledge (no opening book, endgame tables, zero weighting to positional factors etc) while the other had full strength positional analysis but minimal tactical). All the ones I have looked at are stronger tactically than positionally, so I would expect them to still play strongly even in a Fischer Random game. I guess it depends on the particular engine. but computers can beat 'us humans' just like with checkers i held my own against experts and A players, back then although i was rusty. I haven't played a serious chess game since the late 80s in Porto Alegre CC, RS, Brasil. i left California just after High School with mid 1900s USCF provisional, i believe i think it was FIDE as i also played top club players in GB. after Expert, who cares? - it is a mental exercise, that is all Even ER Burroughs had a GREAT game of Martian Chess which is more complicated than ChessĬhess is as dead as checkers. I studied the variations of the standard 'chess' and there are literally hundreds. Give Chess a simple 3rd Dimension and the computer will catch up in the next century and i will be able to beat Deep Blue myself as it will be *lost* Just change ONE variable - switch the Knights and The Bishops positions and all opening theory goes to hell. Secondly, the ONLY reason computers are so 'good' is that they have been programmed really well Some people there have been banned for using engines but it is certainly likely that there are players there still using engines. It is possible that the increased complexity would lead to a game where computer ability outstripped human by an even greater margin.Īnd using engines is against the rules at Red Hot Pawn at least. Regarding 3D chess, it's an interesting idea. Technology is better at many things but that doesn't invalidate the human pursuit of those activities. And my answer is always that it doesn't matter that computers are better. OK, I didn't mean it was you asking 'why do people still play chess? After all computers are better at it' again, but the question seems to come up in nearly every chess thread. I guess I'll stop doing any sort of univariate or bivariate math while I'm at it, because that's all so last millenium. Not like, it'll only take more computing power, as in, not feasible, ever.Īnd what is with the obsession with 3d chess? 2D thinking last millenium? That doesn't even make sense.

Chess has so many orders of magnitude more possible moves than checkers that 'solving' chess (checkers was solved not long ago) is not realistically feasible, ever. Sorry, just my opinion from this guy who used to compete, teach it and write about it'Ĭhess is not where checkers was 20 years ago, nor will it ever be. 'i don't wish to be disrespectful, but this is the first time i have ever asked this question in this millennium. Sorry, just my opinion from this guy who used to compete, teach it and write about it Heck, if the Indians could com up with chess on a 8x8 board, i think we could do well with an 8x8x8 board for example. It is a serious question as Chess is where Checkers was 20 years agoĪnd 3-D chess has writen rules although they are not agreed upon - Gene Roddenberry made up his OWN rules for ST I don't wish to be disrespectful, but this is the first time i have ever asked this question in this millennium.

That way lies madness and Cylons and robot domination and the blood and the screaming and the laser beam eyes.Įdit: Woo! We now have 20 members and so can have our own forum. A motorbike can cover a cross country course much faster than human runners, so why do we still have cross country races? Or marathons, or 100m sprints? Just because technology can do something doesn't mean people shouldn't or that they shouldn't enjoy it.

Chessmaster 10 cannot enable 3d engine