3 ms·
>Sadly en passant (the funny move) is not implemented yet because I have no idea how it would work. That's ... straighforward enough, I think? En passant exist
by SilasX 4y ago
>Sadly en passant (the funny move) is not implemented yet because I have no idea how it would work.
That's ... straighforward enough, I think? En passant exists because it feels unfair that a pawn could use its double-move (here, >1.0 move) to bypass another pawn's capture.
So, in analog chess, the en passant rule would be "if a pawn move of >1.0 passes through the capture zone of the other side's pawn, that pawn retains the right to capture (on the next move) as if it (the former pawn) had moved to a point within the capture zone".
Still don't see why analog chess would be interest rather than just frustratingly complex?
- MaceOutWindu 4y agoyeah in analog chess you could just check if the other pawns near it collide in trajectories when doing the double move and if they do then en passant is in effect.
- AnotherGoodName 4y agoTo make it more concrete: When a pawn moves more than distance 1 it could leave behind a shadow at distance 1. Capturing that shadow with a pawn captures that pawn. It's effectively how you explain en passant to a new player.
- gliptic 4y agoSimilarily, it should not be too hard to implement checkmate. If, on your move, any of the opponent pieces can capture your king and this remains true wherever the king moves, you're mated. Should only require overlap detection between linear and circular swept discs. EDIT: Ok, a bit more complex than that, but still doable I think. Find a point on the king movement lines that are at least one radius away from the union of the capture areas. You would also not be allowed to move the king anywhere where the opponent can capture it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- huevosabio 4y agoI never thought of en passant like that! This makes a lot more sense now, and feels less like a vestigial rule from some version of chess.