I think we should start a vote for a change in gameplay that if selected would initiate a change in the chess engine allowing for forced moves, a forced move being any move that is the only move that a player can make, to be automatic. This would allow the opposing player to continue the game, in some cases to its end or in many others one or two moves ahead, instead of having to wait for his/her opponent to eventually make these non-choices. One suggestion would be to make it so the other player could see all the moves that have progressed via the "last move highlighting" only with small numbers in one of the bottom corners of the square showing their place in the progression. Any regular player would also know how to check the game's progress under the analyze board section meaning this system would not provide complication. Naturally this system would only be acceptable if it were chosen by the majority in a vote, but I for one would be for it.
I would vote - no - of a reason I couldn't explain other than it feels intuitionally wrong.
On the other hand – there is always a choice. To give up at any point. To ask for a draw of strategical reasons. To let the time flow to timeout. And perhaps more reasons, acceptable or not.
Originally posted by ItalyBoyBlueI prefer letting players always make their own moves. The situation you describe, where a player has only one legal move, is so rare that it's not worth the time and trouble to write the code to deal with it.
I think we should start a vote for a change in gameplay that if selected would initiate a change in the chess engine allowing for forced moves, a forced move being any move that is the only move that a player can make, to be automatic. This would allow the opposing player to continue the game, in some cases to its end or in many others one or two moves ...[text shortened]... nly be acceptable if it were chosen by the majority in a vote, but I for one would be for it.
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveCompletely different.
Sounds very similar to this Thread 50721 where Russ says "This is coming".
Yes to the idea which Russ has said is coming, and no to this idea. I'd hate to log on and find a position which is completely different to the one I left. Fair enough, there is only 1 choice, but I still like to look through my future option, and keep track of my game.
At least with conditional moves, if I am programming in moves, then I am still keeping track of the game.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakRags, this goes beyond that!
Completely different.
Yes to the idea which Russ has said is coming, and no to this idea. I'd hate to log on and find a position which is completely different to the one I left. Fair enough, there is only 1 choice, but I still like to look through my future option, and keep track of my game.
At least with conditional moves, if I am programming in moves, then I am still keeping track of the game.
D
If you are playing a timed game no one comes up and tells you your only move available. A chess player needs to figure out their only legal move on their own.
RHP making any move that the player did not think of would be 3rd party assistance.
After writing this post, I have some thoughts on conditional moves.
P-
I don't understand why you guys are so attached to decisions that are already made for you... it's silly. Would you be more obliged to having it so that the moves aren't made for you but the opposing player can play their future moves (perhaps in this case "provisional" future moves) based on the inevitable outcome???
Also anyone who considers a game with an average of 3 days per move and 7 days in timebank allowances a timed game is completely rediculous.
Also I'm not sure what you guys are talking about with provisional moves. Sounds like you guys want to control what your opponent does via trial and error as apposed to keep the initiative and controlling position. Agree/Disagree?
Originally posted by ItalyBoyBlueFairs fair mate, you have to give people plenty of time to consult their databases etc etc etc. 😉
Also anyone who considers a game with an average of 3 days per move and 7 days in timebank allowances a timed game is completely rediculous.
Originally posted by ItalyBoyBlueI think in a perfect world we would select an option:
I think we should start a vote for a change in gameplay that if selected would initiate a change in the chess engine allowing for forced moves, a forced move being any move that is the only move that a player can make, to be automatic. This would allow the opposing player to continue the game, in some cases to its end or in many others one or two moves nly be acceptable if it were chosen by the majority in a vote, but I for one would be for it.
"Play my moves instantly if there is no legal choice? Y/N"
Then we could each play as we like to play.
Not a bad idea... I'm sure some players would make forced moves automatic if it were available.
As for my comment above, in chess a timed game is rarely as long as this site allows. It has to do with the nature of this type of internet play. In actual chess databases arent allowed to be checked with.