I think chess would be a game worthy of a contest. It is a simple game that requires a programmer to focus mostly on AI.
I think chess would be a game worthy of a contest. It is a simple game that requires a programmer to focus mostly on AI.
Well if the game has to be played agains the comp then we have to use backtracking algorithms.. And one week is not enough.. But if it is a 2 player game then we just require to validate the moves... I think this can be done in a week...
sounds like a good idea. i agree with vasanth here, it's better not to have to implement AI in only one week.
>It is a simple game that requires a programmer to focus mostly on AI.
Maybe to you and Gary Kasparov ...
Have you heard of Bobby Fischer?
>Have you heard of Bobby Fischer?
Vaguely, isn't he still the World Champion?
I have the source to a graphical chess game, if anyone wants it let me know.
I am in the process of writing one myself, got everything down except the parser.
well yes i would like to see it.. I am in the process fo creating my own.. the one u have may give me ideas....
my mail id is [email protected]
Does the chess thing have to be a win32 program? cuz im only good with console right now i just started c++. I could make a 2p chess in console app but i know nothing about win32 stuff
You would need some form of graphics for the pieces I would assume.
Bobby Fischer used to be the world champion I think, check out the movie Searching for Bobby Fischer. I think only Kasparov reached a higher rating than he did, although I am not sure. A good chess AI is a great challenge because chess is such a complicated game, the possibility of moves never end.
1) Can't a 6 month old thread die in piece?
2) The possibilities do end. There are a finite number of moves in chess before the game either reaches a checkmate or a stalemate. Remember the 30 moves (sometimes played with 50 or more) without taking a piece = stalemate rule.
Away.
I think SourceCode is talking about the sequence of moves possible from any given position. To analyze every possible sequence even just a few moves ahead is a daunting task for us humans. The top players are able to take a given position and decide which first moves are worth analyzing further.
Yea thats what I was talking about, and yea it is really hard to think many moves ahead. That is what makes chess so fun I guess, who can think deeper ahead and anticipate all of the oponents moves multiple turns ahead of time.
It would be more reasonable to say:Originally posted by blackrat364
2) The possibilities do end. [/B]
"There is a finite number of atoms within the universe."
AIM: MarderIII
On the contrary, it would not be more reasonable to say that there are a finite number of atoms in the universe. Although theories abound, we have not yet discovered any outer limit to the universe, and therefore that conclusion is not valid. However, there are only 64 squares on a chess board, and up to 16 pieces that you can move. Several pieces will only have a couple possible places where they can move on each turn, further limiting the possiblities. Eventually, the game will either end in checkmate or stalemate, and there are limits placed on how long this can take in the rules. There may be more possible chess games than you could ever count, that I do not know, but I do know that the number of games is finite, and can not be otherwise.
Away.
