In this case, from Hiarcs, I would expect is....
Is a wonderfully new, original GUI, something capable of making of the metaphor of it the full desktop metaphor, with a real chess companion ready to look at our games and spot our weaknesses even if we are using, say, the word processor. A friend always there, always ON, always offering "want to play?" in any moment.... Kind of a Russian GM at our service, as a a lackey.
I am expecting such kind of thing since several years ago and I just get, once and again, the same Grey square with a more powerful engine into it as If I was not already trashed by engines produced three generations ago.
Which is the sense of all that, beyond the egotistic pursuing of getting the fame of the "strongest engine"...for a month or two?
Mark, give some though to that. Or hire a guy to do that.
No more engines to be engaged in arena or CB.
Give us a new PROGRAM.
My best
Fernando
What I would expect instead of even more stronger engines..
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Here is another request/suggestion :
I never play against engines but I am using them to analyze the games played either by me or by me dedicated machines.
These analysis are run in two modes :
1) post mortem => the engines point out weak moves but do not explain really why the suggested line is a lot better than the real move
2) real time for dedicated vs dedicated machine. I can understand a game played between Mephisto I and Chess Challenger 7, but I don't understand anything when the game is between a Turniermachine and a Sparc
Here, I would like the engine to be also more didactic : why does it give an evaluation of +1.2 when the material is even ? May be just slicing the evaluation in a few categories (mobility, structure, etc...) would be enough ?
Another need here : the other day, such machines were playing an endgame with many pawns, a minor piece and a rook each, and I was wondering : "should the Sparc try to exchange rooks ?"
=> I'd like to have an easy way to ask the engine to evaluate the positions without the rooks (or any other piece), a kind of "what if?" function...
Of course, I could recreate the position from scratch and ask the engine to do the analysis but as the game evolves, I would have to repeat the operation over and over...
Best regards,
Alain
I never play against engines but I am using them to analyze the games played either by me or by me dedicated machines.
These analysis are run in two modes :
1) post mortem => the engines point out weak moves but do not explain really why the suggested line is a lot better than the real move
2) real time for dedicated vs dedicated machine. I can understand a game played between Mephisto I and Chess Challenger 7, but I don't understand anything when the game is between a Turniermachine and a Sparc
Here, I would like the engine to be also more didactic : why does it give an evaluation of +1.2 when the material is even ? May be just slicing the evaluation in a few categories (mobility, structure, etc...) would be enough ?
Another need here : the other day, such machines were playing an endgame with many pawns, a minor piece and a rook each, and I was wondering : "should the Sparc try to exchange rooks ?"
=> I'd like to have an easy way to ask the engine to evaluate the positions without the rooks (or any other piece), a kind of "what if?" function...
Of course, I could recreate the position from scratch and ask the engine to do the analysis but as the game evolves, I would have to repeat the operation over and over...
Best regards,
Alain
Chess engines have chess knowledge and one idea would be that the engine telling that what makes it play such move is "keep bishop pair", "exchange rooks and my passed pawn will be safer", etc. That is display what are the most important rule(s) that made the decision.Alain wrote:Here is another request/suggestion :
Here, I would like the engine to be also more didactic : why does it give an evaluation of +1.2 when the material is even ? May be just slicing the evaluation in a few categories (mobility, structure, etc...) would be enough ?
Alain
I also fully agree with Fernando : I'd prefer a chess engine weaker by 100 ELO, but with all the features, bells and whistles we use daily (training, opening learning, post mortem analysis, playing against an human-like opponent, etc.).
Pascal
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact: