82
chessfinder2e (lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Well the saying goes "if you aim for the king, you best not miss". I think going for check or checkmate should be 3 actions, same with capturing with king. Mostly because the king would likely be in check in most situations where the king can capture

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 4 points 2 months ago

Oh yeah, I like that.

I'd say it should do away with checkmate and use a Drawback Chess–style system where you win by capturing the king. This would cost 3 actions. I think merely moving into check could cost 2.

My original idea was that capturing with king would cost less than a normal capture because I wanted to buff the king's ability to protect himself, and in particular I was worried about strategies that could force the opponent to spend 2 actions capturing your piece with their king. But making moving into check cost 2 actions and capturing the king cost 3 would completely negate the need for that.

Moving into check with a capture would, obviously, cost 3 actions (1 for move, 1 extra for capturing, 1 extra for the check). And discovered checks would also cost 2 actions, with discovered check via a capture costing 3.

[-] explore_broaden@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

It would make sense not to have discovered check cost extra, which would encourage that kind of strategizing.

this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
82 points (96.6% liked)

AnarchyChess

4899 readers
26 users here now

Holy hell

Other chess communities:
!Chess@lemmy.ml
!chessbeginners@sh.itjust.works

Matrix space

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS