|Accidie - 2016-02-08 |
There are very few human beings alive who needed chess to be any more complicated, let alone this much more complicated.
Agreed, I think this would be more fun if they started with a simple game -- a quantum tic-tac-toe or quantum connect four. That could really get you thinking about the strategic implications of probabilities and entanglements.
|SolRo - 2016-02-08 |
not sure anyone that really likes chess would want an element of chance being added to it.
bonus points if you find a chess fan ranting about how this isnt real chess
Not sure there's anyone who really does like Chess. It seems more a pathological obsession than anything else.
You never really find mid range players. Either someone just knows the movement rules and not much else, or they've memorized all the openings and studied hundreds of hours of grandmaster games.
I like chess. It's better at that sweet spot you describe. The magic happens when you're good enough to see it as a finely balanced game of emergent strategy, but not so obsessed that you're a computer who only sees the game as a collection of the rote outcomes of various proven gambits.
I've even heard Chess grandmasters say that it's not really a good game, when you get to the highest level of play. Maybe you were never meant to.
Two Jar Slave
Yeah, there's a pretty significant middle ground between only understanding the pieces' movements and GM-level memorization. I had the most fun with Chess when I started to get stuff like territorial control, tempo, trade values, common tactics (forks, spears, reveals), useful piece combinations, even playing around with timers and stuff. I was only ever average at the game, but there's a lot of fun to be had before embarking into the "pathological" realm, if that's what we're calling expertise these days.
What I don't understand about this video is why the bishop didn't capture the quantum Queen. No quantum attacks?
Two Jar - from the description, it sounds like only one single quantum-state piece can occupy any given space at any given time. For every situation where quantum-states are contested, one piece must have moved, and the other must have stayed put; therefore, no quantum attacks can occur.
What I don't get is the reasoning behind B(qE6)qB3. Q(qD3)qB3 is a weak move to begin with (unless white is trying for some amazing Quantum Scholar's Mate?) and surely, it doesn't need to be countered, let alone countered with a sacrificed Bishop three moves into the game!
I'm terrible at openings, so is there something I'm missing here? Why on earth would the players make those moves?
I've been studying chess for about 3 years now and I'm pretty sure it's been slowing ruining my mind. My problem with the game isn't the incredible accuracy that masters play at (despite contrary belief, you can play a candidate move in a majority of positions based on intuition alone with minimal calculation and memorization, this goes especially for the opening), it's the role of computers. They're a great tool for analysis and getting better but as a consequence they've sucked all the brilliancy right out. everyone is now an armchair master.
Homer, I just figured it was to demonstrate how the queen can turn the corner. Or who knows, maybe it's a really good move in Quantum Chess?
Hack writers also do this with quantum mechanics. What can you do?
In this case however, the game is a pretty nice analog of the way the physical universe operates. You've got, at the macro scale, a deterministic system which is the standard game of chess. Now drill down to the micro scale, and where the pieces interact, you have uncertainty and quantum effects. I like the idea, but for deeper reasons feel it would work better with checkers than with chess.
|Nominal - 2016-02-08 |
Anyone remember Laser Chess for the Commodore 64? The queen was a laser that could shoot and kill any piece along a queen's movement paths without actually moving there. Most of the other pieces were different kinds of mirrors you moved around that could angle laser shots. Only a couple of pieces could capture others in the traditional chess sense.
Two Jar Slave
Chess variants can be so fun. I haven't played laser chess, but I used to play a variant called 'take me', where any threatened piece MUST be captured immediately. Really turns your brain inside out. I also learned to play Star Trek's tri-dimensional chess this fall, but didn't like it as much as I'd hoped. Playing variants is a good reminder that 'normal' chess is itself just a really popular Renaissance variant, originally called 'Madwoman' because of the crazy powers given to the queen.
Ashtar - was it full-contact Calvin Chess? Do I need to wear the mask?
EH: That's the beauty of Calvin Chess! If you make up a rule on your turn that everyone gets hit on the arm, then, yes, it's full contact.
|chumbucket - 2016-02-08 |
I think he just super-positioned the fun right out of this game.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|