Holy hell
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
2902 readers
3 users here now
!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.
Our Rules:
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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
What is the smallest change you can do to the game, so that computer wont win against master anymore?
You can only move pieces to squares with pictures of crosswalks on them.
Every time a piece is about to hit another, the players have to arm wrestle and the winner takes the loser's piece (if you can't arm wrestle then you lose automatically).
Machines will win 100% of arm wrestling matches if they're built to do so. We can't compete with the strength of a hydrologic servo.
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
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.
Also, in that case having first move advantage would be seen as unbalanced.
Queen OP, pls fix.
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.
wait the bishop changed??
In the olden days Bishops could move only 2 squares and jump over other pieces like knights.
Interesting, that's how it still works in Chinese chess.
I think they meant balance as in the pieces haven't received nerfs or buffs.
Yes and this isn't necessary because the two sides are completely identical. No differences in pieces or terrain or anything so there's no need to change a piece to make it stronger or weaker.
So I can't get a Battlepass knight? That doesn't seem fair.
view more: next ›