4 ms·
Interesting. Note that both of those types involve introducing new pieces. I would argue that this changes the fundamental nature of the game in a way that incr
by mindgam3 7y ago
Interesting. Note that both of those types involve introducing new pieces. I would argue that this changes the fundamental nature of the game in a way that increasing board size alone doesn’t. The reason is that I (as a human chess master) would need to retrain myself to learn the new piece movements.
What I really want is a 10x10 or even 8x10 board using the original set of pieces. This would be sufficient to prove that human chess masters can adapt in a way that machine-learning based algorithms cannot.
- qiqitori 7y agoWouldn't adding more of the existing pieces in the back row change the game a bit too? Which piece(s) would you suggest having more of to accomodate the extra fields?
- mindgam3 7y agoIt would change the game but not enough to reduce the performance gap between an expert and a novice. See my grandparent comment for a specific suggestion on which pieces to use.