3 ms·
Interesting. I feel like there needs to be a rule which forces a stalemate at some point. Currently the only rule is 'when the players agree,'... but if one of
by anthony_romeo 11y ago
Interesting. I feel like there needs to be a rule which forces a stalemate at some point. Currently the only rule is 'when the players agree,'... but if one of them refuses to agree the game could never end until one player just resigns in frustration.
In FIDE chess, there is a rule something along the lines of 'if no pawn moves are made within fifty consecutive turns, the game is a stalemate.' This game should probably have a rule like, 'if no piece crosses the center line within fifty consecutive turns, the game ends.'
Edit... thinking about this more, I really can't think of a situation where the player refusing the stalemate could possibly benefit.
- m1k3r420 11y agoI guess the total potential score available on the board from the remaining pieces against the current score of each player would show the winner before a stalemate situation came about.
- umanwizard 11y agoI can't resist the nitpick: you mean "draw", not "stalemate". A stalemate is one particular situation that causes the game to end in a draw.