I play a lot of antichess, I love it... But I am starting to get bored of the same strategies over and over. I really want a variant where you are not forced to capture. I really think this will make the game a lot more interesting, not to mention long lasting.
Maybe it's time to branch out to one of the other Five variants, or perhaps one of the four time controls for standard chess.
Such a variant would be pointless. You could just refuse to capture any of your opponent's pieces, thereby guaranteeing that you will not lose.
Dionysus, oh no, I am a complete addict unfortunately lol.
Umm....that would make no sense at all. I think that all antichess games could end in a draw with that rule.
You should really play more than 2 games of antichess before making any assumptions (unless you're an alt, of course). You're not "a complete addict". Play more than 14,000 games, like azzarak.
Antichess really focuses on the fact that you should never give up, and that you can always make insane comebacks (I'm known as a comeback kid in the ac community).
If you don't like it, don't play it.
Antichess really focuses on the fact that you should never give up, and that you can always make insane comebacks (I'm known as a comeback kid in the ac community).
If you don't like it, don't play it.
I have played 1000+ games of AC. I mainly play as anon yes, I simply have this account for occasions like this post.
My point is, in general, all variations have different rule sets IRL, and I think this site and others should look into that. I have played a lot of antichess IRL and when me and the opponent have agreed to not have a mandatory capture, things have gotten really interesting. Then it's all about strategically placing your pieces for an even more interesting end game.
To counter a quick draw, one could impliment the rule that the first player to complete a repetition of three moves forfeits.
The reason why I am suggesting is that I am dead tired of players doing the same cheesy moves over and over...
My point is, in general, all variations have different rule sets IRL, and I think this site and others should look into that. I have played a lot of antichess IRL and when me and the opponent have agreed to not have a mandatory capture, things have gotten really interesting. Then it's all about strategically placing your pieces for an even more interesting end game.
To counter a quick draw, one could impliment the rule that the first player to complete a repetition of three moves forfeits.
The reason why I am suggesting is that I am dead tired of players doing the same cheesy moves over and over...
without mandatory capture there is no point to play antichess anymore!!!
Antichess is damn too cool!!
Its like maths, some like it and some don't .
Now that's up to you whether you wanna play it or not.
For those who think its all about repeated moves than can you beat AM-Veritas if you know every move that well?
Guys, please don't comment negative about it!
And i agree with Dionysus, maybe its the time for you to switch to a different variant.
Its like maths, some like it and some don't .
Now that's up to you whether you wanna play it or not.
For those who think its all about repeated moves than can you beat AM-Veritas if you know every move that well?
Guys, please don't comment negative about it!
And i agree with Dionysus, maybe its the time for you to switch to a different variant.
Just please don't bring any changes to ANTICHESS.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.