Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. 28 Oct '03 22:44
    Just a thought which could possibly save site bandwidth...? [although probably horrendously difficult to program/implement]

    1.
    If a move is forced, then it is played automatically by the site.
    e.g. Player A checks Players B's King. The King has only one free square, so the site makes the move automatically for Player B. No need for B to use bandwidth making the move?

    2.
    An If this - Do this box.
    E.g. Player A makes some move and in a new field specifies for next move:

    If this: QxQ [ie if Player B does QxQ]
    Do this: NxQ [if condition is met make my move automatically]

    The other advantage is this may speed the game along abit too...

    Unrealistic?
  2. Donation Rhymester
    and RedHotTed
    28 Oct '03 23:05
    Originally posted by Lazaraus
    Just a thought which could possibly save site bandwidth...? [although probably horrendously difficult to program/implement]

    1.
    If a move is forced, then it is played automatically by the site.
    e.g. Player A checks Players B's King. The King has only one free square, so the site makes the move automatically for Player B. No need for B to use bandwidth ...[text shortened]... tomatically]

    The other advantage is this may speed the game along abit too...

    Unrealistic?
    This has been suggested a few times before... but it's still a good idea. Only Russ knows how feasible it would be. Even the 'king has only one square to move to' one would be nice.

    Andrew
  3. 29 Oct '03 15:02
    Often when there is only one move, a resignation is not very far away. (I am particularly thinking of the situation where the only way out of a check is to give up a piece and then the next move is checkmate.)
    Many players might prefer to be allowed the dignity of resigning rather than have the system make the forced move for them.

    On the other hand, conditional moves would be nice, albeit very dangerous to a lot of players. 🙄
  4. 29 Oct '03 18:51
    Originally posted by RolandYoung
    Often when there is only one move, a resignation is not very far away. (I am particularly thinking of the situation where the only way out of a check is to give up a piece and then the next move is checkmate.)
    Many players might prefer to be allowed the dignity of resigning rather than have the system make the forced move for them.

    On the other hand, conditional moves would be nice, albeit very dangerous to a lot of players. 🙄
    Yes that's true.
    Also I suppose it is possible the site could then effectively force a mate that may not have been observed by the player - although if one move depth then no problem....

    I suppose you would get around this by having a conditional move check box during game creation.

    Much of the problem here is an efficient way to check for legal moves. This in itself may well put additional strain on the RHC servers, so the saving in bandwidth may be lost by increased power useage by processor and shortening the lifetime of of components.

    Oh well - seemed like a good idea at the time 🙂
  5. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    30 Oct '03 10:21
    It is a good idea, no doubt about that.

    It should not be too tricky to code a basic implementation of this. Two things that effect what modifications I take on at the moment:

    1) Potential benefit to all users.
    2) Testing effort required. (Significant, in this case)

    My attention will be switching back to creating a clan league soon - which is a priority. Once that goes live, ask for this again, and I will try to get it done.

    -Russ
  6. 30 Oct '03 12:18
    Well...I think it's oke, but it should be optional, 'cause I would like to just take a quick look at the game, even when I would only have one move left...🙂

    Olav