Fatty vs. Undersealcpl

[UnderseaLcpl]

Interested in an easy win?

Your move

Lance

[Tchocky]

Oh, it's chess.

Carry on :p

[fatty]

Ok, I have never played by correspondence or with notation like this so bear with me while I figure things out. Good luck!

1. e2 e4

[UnderseaLcpl]

d7-d5

No problem. I'm a casual player myself. Good luck to you as well.
Been playing for long?

[Task Force]

Wonder who will win?

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Task Force

Wonder who will win?

Fatty

[Task Force]

Ya never know. Remember, anything is possiable.

[fatty]

e4xd5

First learned about 6 years ago, play now about every month or two. Yourself?

[UnderseaLcpl]

n b8-c6

My dad taught me when I was four or five, but thrashed me until my teens. He thought I was quite talented, but that's only because he is so bad at the game.
When I refused to join the chess club in 8th grade in favor of the debate team he gave up. But I made a lot of money challenging drunk marines to chess matches in OIF 3. Hardly the background of a prodigy but I love the game nonetheless. I think most of my success is due to the ineptitude of my opponents rather than my own skill.
The game's depth makes a mockery of modern RTS computer games, don't you think?

[Skybird]

[fatty]

d5xc6

I learned in the back of a history class in the tenth grade. After I whooped my friend who was teaching me, his pride could not allow him to admit defeat. At that point I began to study up on the basic strategies for the rematch of the century. I have never played in any clubs or serious matches or anything, never bothered to learn any of the openings or study the pros. I just like the mental workout of trying to blaze my own trail.

Maybe it depends on the computer game, but I think the great depth of chess lies in its lack of glitzy graphics or hifi sound effects. When I use the programs that render the pieces in full 3d with fancy stylings and background music, I take a much more lax approach and lose almost every time. My real pieces, plainly carved and fairly ordinary, are overturned in my mind looking for an extra dimension that really isn't there. But I guess my subconscious won't accept it, and these dinky little pieces take on a dangerous, suspicious character of their own, and the pressure is on.

If you could somehow play Age of Empires with innocuous wooden tiles I suspect the effect would be similar.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by fatty

d5xc6

I learned in the back of a history class in the tenth grade. After I whooped my friend who was teaching me, his pride could not allow him to admit defeat. At that point I began to study up on the basic strategies for the rematch of the century. I have never played in any clubs or serious matches or anything, never bothered to learn any of the openings or study the pros. I just like the mental workout of trying to blaze my own trail.

Maybe it depends on the computer game, but I think the great depth of chess lies in its lack of glitzy graphics or hifi sound effects. When I use the programs that render the pieces in full 3d with fancy stylings and background music, I take a much more lax approach and lose almost every time. My real pieces, plainly carved and fairly ordinary, are overturned in my mind looking for an extra dimension that really isn't there. But I guess my subconscious won't accept it, and these dinky little pieces take on a dangerous, suspicious character of their own, and the pressure is on.

If you could somehow play Age of Empires with innocuous wooden tiles I suspect the effect would be similar.

You're talking of distraction caused by fancy eye-candy. I admit that many abstract strategy-games do bore me, like checkers, but sometimes there are things that convince me. the relatively modern game "Abalone" is such an example. It looks super-elegant and beautiful to the eye, in all it's spartan under-statement, the rules are few, and simple. But yet - if you start playing you can't get enough, and all the complexity and dynamic it allows unfolds to both the intellect, and the eye.




I have seen deluxe-versions, with very noble looking glass-boards and glass-orbs. Unfortunately i suck at it because I almost never play it, did not systemtically learn it, and somehow find it difficult to think myself into it. Guess I'm an old grim chess warrior forever. But I admire the simple elegance and the elegant simplicity in the design, both rules and material. It's almost a perfect design.

[fatty]

Eye candy is a large part of it. Having everything laid out for you - that is, drawn in 3d or 2d as true as possible to what they are supposed to represent - reduces the imagination and I am not able to get as emotionally involved. I enjoy playing Silent Hunter or whatever for the challenge they present but I never get the same sinking feeling in my heart wondering now if I have made some catastrophic blunder and what UnderseaLCpl's devious plan is. I would tear my hair out over a game like Abalone because as I think you said somewhere else, the fate of the universe would rest on the shoulders of those tiny ordinary black and white balls It's the kind of paradox that gets the blood pumping!

[UnderseaLcpl]

b7-c6

My devious plan is that I mapped your last move wrong.

Sorry for the delay, work you know.

btw, the object of Silent Hunter is to give your enemies that sinking feeling.
I do love my little puns, I fear.

I think you're right about the visual distractions in some games, but I was referring more to the rock-paper-scissors mentality they all seem to suffer from, and the fact that beating a human opponent is usually about speed and swamping them with units.

[fatty]

f1-c4

You're probably right there. I don't play many (any?) RTS games online for that reason. I'm just not so quick a thinker under those circumstances

Edit: hurray 1000 posts!