Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Blizzard Chess

By Blarney in Technology
Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 12:45:48 PM EST
Tags: Humour (all tags)

We'd like to thank all our fans for making Chess the success it is - can't do it without you, guys! Anyway, we're having a few game balance issues, so we're issuing another patch to Chess. Please see details inside.

Patch 1.01

Most high-level Chess players online recently are using the "center pawn rush" every single game! In order to restore game balance, we're revoking the ability of King Pawns and Queen Pawns to move 2 squares on the first move - from now on, they will only move 1 square per move. All other pawns can move 2 squares as before, which should hopefully end the "center pawn rush" from now on.

Patch 1.04

The Rook units are severly underused, only coming into the game late or, in some games, never. In order to rectify this, we have given the Rooks a special ability. From now on, given that a Rook and the corresponding Rook Pawn have not yet been moved, a player may simultaneously play P-R4 and R-R3. This should get the Rooks into play and restore balance to the Chess units.

Patch 1.05

Nobody is using the new Fast Advance ability of the Rook units, due to problems with the Bishop fields of fire blocking the Rook entry points! In order to rectify this imbalance, positions of Bishops and Knights will be reversed at start. This small change should not interfere with the strategies of experienced players, and will provide a much better game.

Patch 1.07

The Queen is overly powerful, being able to move like a Bishop or a Rook. This is redundant - why would anyone use a Bishop instead of a Queen! Furthermore, we have observed that loss of a Queen usually leads to loss of the game, a level of importance which should only be granted to the King! From now on, the Queen may only move 4 squares in any direction, reducing her strength to an amount closer to that of a Rook.

Patch 1.11

We have noticed that many games tend to slow down near the end, as Pawn formations lock against each other. In order to prevent this and ensure a more dynamic game, Pawns now promote on the 7th rank rather than the 8th. Also, when a Pawn cannot move forward due to another piece obstructing it's motion, it may move sideways one square.

Patch 1.12

Pawns have become too powerful, so we have altered the behavior of the Knight. From now on a Knight may capture a Pawn belonging to the opponent by jumping over it, as well as by landing upon it. This new ability may be used to allow a Knight to capture 2 pieces per turn. Jump Captures may only be performed on Pawns, and no other piece, and cannot be used to place the opponent's King in Check.

Patch 1.14

The strength of the Bishop, which should be roughly the same as that of the Knight, has fallen behind after recent alterations of the Knight's abilities. Therefore we have given the Bishop a new Butterfly move where it can jump from one side of the board to another, left to right or vice versa, as if the board was wrapped around itself on a cylinder. For example, a Bishop on F1 can currently move to H3 - with the new Butterfly move, it could also move to A4, B5, C6, etc. The Butterfly move may not be used to capture an enemy piece, nor to place the Opponent's King in Check.

Patch 1.18

The full-range Queen moves are restored, in the special case where they are directed at capture of an Opponent's Bishop or Knight. This should improve game balance.

Patch 1.25

Thank you all for playing Blizzard Chess! We thank you for staying with us during this turbulent year where we've worked out all these issues with game balance, and only have one more patch to even things out before we consider Chess to be finished. The asymmetry where a King can Castle and a Queen cannot has been removed - from now on, a Queen can Castle too, so for instance you can have a King castling Queenside, a King castling Kingside, a Queen castling Queenside, or a Queen castling Kingside! Hope you enjoy this parting gift. We are currently working on an expansion pack for Chess which should be available next Christmas. Thanks so much!


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


Which piece needs to be "nerfed"?
o Pawn 25%
o Queen 35%
o Knight 11%
o Bishop 19%
o Rook 7%

Votes: 92
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Also by Blarney

Display: Sort:
Blizzard Chess | 145 comments (135 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden)
i dont get it (1.95 / 22) (#4)
by DJ Glock on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:25:52 AM EST

is this supposed to be what would happen to the game of chess if some game company like id software were in charge of it?


I'm not surprised. [nt] (1.87 / 8) (#7)
by monkeymind on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:48:10 AM EST

Your witty saying here
[ Parent ]

of course monkeymind gets it (1.42 / 14) (#15)
by DJ Glock on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:56:28 AM EST

only a typical nerd gamer like you would be able to.

"oh yeah, blizzard chess. chess. blizzard. yeah, this wasn't a complete waste of my time."

[ Parent ]

I'm touched, you remember me (1.40 / 5) (#18)
by monkeymind on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:12:41 AM EST

Do continue.

Any more insightful comment about who I am?

Your witty saying here
[ Parent ]

you are probably touching yourself (1.25 / 16) (#25)
by DJ Glock on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:11:58 AM EST

just because a user as prominent as me has taken time out of his day to respond to your inane bullshit trolls.

don't worry, it won't happen again.

[ Parent ]

Self praise is no recomendation (2.00 / 8) (#26)
by monkeymind on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:36:40 AM EST

And 82 comments does not a 'prominent' user make.

I must admit though, you are very good at rating 0 anyone who disagrees with you.

Anything else to add?

Your witty saying here
[ Parent ]

Right on. (3.00 / 3) (#109)
by An onymous Coward on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 01:52:36 AM EST

inane bullshit trolls, huh?
do you feel like a big man now, smart guy?

"Your voice is irrelevant. Stop embarrassing yourself. Please." -stuaart
[ Parent ]
Lay off, He's just venting... (1.00 / 2) (#123)
by Theranthrope on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 09:16:23 PM EST

...his secret homosexual urges. He's a latent homosexual, he's consatantly thinking about violent anal-sex, so he asumes everyone else is too. He is merely projecting his desire for hot, sweaty, man sex onto everyone else by calling them "fag" or "gay."
"Turmeric applied as a suppository will increase intelligence." -- HidingMyName
Parent ]
Idiot (3.66 / 3) (#126)
by Parthon on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 02:40:15 AM EST

Wow. This is the first time I've been to this site and it took him only 3 posts to make himself look like an idiot. I just had to create an account so I could say it personally.

[ Parent ]
i don't get it (3.75 / 4) (#91)
by JahToasted on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:27:15 AM EST

is this troll supposed to be what would happen if you were too cool for both videogames and chess?
"I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" -- Jim Morrison
[ Parent ]
+1 FP when it goes to vote (2.28 / 7) (#5)
by Richard Stallman on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:33:14 AM EST

Absolutely hilarious.

dude (4.53 / 47) (#10)
by Michael Moore on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:11:52 AM EST

wtf is up with this game i mean it was okay... but then you assholes nerfed the queen... ok i admit it was powerful but look at the top 10 players on ksaparov server... almost none of them use queen strats in their games... but meanwhile us other ladders players depend on the queen to get an even footing against the fucking bishop rush and all that shit that goes on in the ladders (if any piece should be nerfed its the bishop) seriously you advertised a game and we bought it, now you go and change all this queen stuff after everyone has been using the queen for like 3 months since release... im not paying for a goddamn beta game here, i expect balance issues to be fixed by the time i fork out $50 for your stupid game, not to have to learn moves over and over again while you guys nerf all the decent pieces every fucking month. what do we get in return for this? 7th rank pawns being promoted??? fuck, thats such a joke, nobody ever uses that shit... you really need to get your act together blizzard, there are so many games coming out and my friend in checkers beta says its fucking kicking ass... if i dont see an improvement in chess by then i'm out of here along with about half your other players... LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYERS, BLIZZARD... im really getting sick of this shit

"My life was more improved by a single use of [ecstasy] than someone's life is made worse by becoming a heroin addict." -- aphrael
The funny thing is... (none / 0) (#84)
by Silent Chris on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 09:34:50 AM EST

Blizzard players don't pay anything yet they feel a right to complain.

[ Parent ]
Ummm (4.33 / 3) (#85)
by Boing on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 10:16:41 AM EST

Since when do Blizzard players pay nothing?  Are there free copies of Frozen Throne being distributed that work on Battle.net that I don't know about?  Maybe we don't pay to use Battle.net once we've bought the game, but don't think for a minute that that service would exist if it didn't profitably increase game revenue.

Second, complaining is always free.  It's getting someone who matters to listen to you that can cost money (see: $99 per "incident" for Microsoft's online technical support for Windows XP Professional).

[ Parent ]

I'm talking about 5+ year old games (none / 0) (#96)
by Silent Chris on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 01:03:58 PM EST

And yes, I'm referring specifically to battle.net.  Everquest players pay monthly, so they have every right to complain when their guy gets toasted.  In Blizzard's case, I'm still seeing people complain about balance in WarCraft II: Battle.net edition.  At this point, I doubt any Blizzard employees PLAYS that game, let alone programs for it.  

The way I figure it: $50 + $30 for expansion pack (StarCraft) = 8 years of gaming.  $80 / (365 * 8) = $0.90 a month.  You don't have a right to complain over $0.90.

[ Parent ]

Complaining is still free (5.00 / 3) (#100)
by Boing on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 02:44:35 PM EST

I'm still seeing people complain about balance in WarCraft II: Battle.net edition. At this point, I doubt any Blizzard employees PLAYS that game, let alone programs for it.
The players can still complain, all Blizzard has to do is ignore it, understanding that they may pay a slight cost in customer loyalty for "abandoning" those players. But I'm sure the cost of maintenance for WC2:BNE is much greater than the cost in loyalty, especially since anyone still playing WC2 is probably already very loyal to Blizzard.

$80 / (365 * 8) = $0.90 a month. You don't have a right to complain over $0.90.
So one person whose Everquest character gets trashed by a data error gets "every right to complain" up to $10 a month, but "nerfing" a race in Starcraft affects many many Starcraft players. Even if only 1000 people are opposed to the change, your calculation makes that a $900/month complaint for Blizzard.

I'm not saying the lone Everquest player doesn't have a right to complain. I'm saying that you have the right to complain in all circumstances, and that Blizzard is no more free of obligation than the Everquest developers, or the Anarchy online developers.

The only people clearly free of obligation are the ones offering the game and any services for free. That doesn't include any commercial companies as far as I know... the only ones I know of in that category are freeware/open source game developers.

[ Parent ]

Wish list (4.61 / 13) (#13)
by BadDoggie on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:15:56 AM EST

Chess 2.0: Add-on skins. Instead of King, Queen, and all these other old-fashioned groups, I want pieces like Prime Minister, Vice President, Secretary of State, Minnesota Militia for the pawns, and so on.

I'm pretty sure someone will design a commemorative Iraqi set, with Dictator, Son of Dictator, Information Minister, Minister of Culture, Torturer, etc.

The possibilities are endless. And this would lead to being able to make the board bigger in future versions and add aircraft and stuff.


"Non videri sed esse." — Tycho Brahe "Not to be seen but to be."

the American pieces (4.50 / 4) (#17)
by idea poet on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:04:10 AM EST

Sure you'd do George Bush as King. But you'd have to do Karl Rove as Queen - not Cheney. That is the man who is actually running the USA.

[ Parent ]
Karl Rove? (3.50 / 1) (#48)
by Burning Straw Man on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:57:09 PM EST

I've never heard of this person before reading your comment.
your straw man is on fire...
[ Parent ]
Karl Rove (5.00 / 4) (#55)
by Kaeru the Frog on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:48:57 PM EST

I've never heard of this person before reading your comment.

And that's the way he likes it.

[ Parent ]
Of course, (2.50 / 2) (#101)
by Happy Monkey on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 02:45:25 PM EST

That's what Cheney would like, too. Too bad there's a pesky law putting the vice president's name on the ballot.
Length 17, Width 3
[ Parent ]
Skins (3.50 / 1) (#33)
by b1t r0t on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 12:54:16 PM EST

I can imagine even more possiblities with skinning expansion packs. They could move into licensed media with skin sets from Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, etc. The best part is that each skin set could contain an all new piece with unique movement abilities!

-- Indymedia: the fanfiction.net of journalism.
[ Parent ]
Actually... (3.66 / 2) (#51)
by gidds on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:51:59 PM EST

This is a little-documented feature of Chess 1.0!

I remember one Christmas spending a very enjoyable time playing a friend using his Simpsons set...

[ Parent ]

sounds like blitzkrieg chess as well (4.44 / 9) (#14)
by pb on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:49:08 AM EST

I wish I could find a link to the one other chess joke I found amusing--it was a review of chess written in the average bored videogame reviewer style that is so common these days.

Instead, I'd just like to mention that the chess mod for NeverWinter Nights is way cool; all you need to do is find a way to hook up a real computer player or two, and it'd be like a way updated version of Battle Chess.
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall

Is this it? (5.00 / 3) (#16)
by Blarney on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:56:36 AM EST

Is this it?

I think it's an April Fools article.

[ Parent ]

no, but that's a good start [nt] (none / 0) (#19)
by pb on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:15:36 AM EST

"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]
This must be the review: (5.00 / 10) (#24)
by bsimon on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 06:59:06 AM EST

By Greg Kasavin

The latest offering in the rapidly overflowing strategy genre is hard evidence that strategy games need a real overhaul, and fast. Chess, a small-scale tactical turn-based strategy game, attempts to adopt the age-old "easy to learn, difficult to master" paradigm made popular by Tetris.

But the game's cumbersome play mechanics and superficial depth and detail all add up to a game that won't keep you busy for long.

Chess casts you as king of a small country at war with a rival country of equivalent military power.
There is little background story to speak of, and by and large the units in the game are utterly lacking any character whatsoever. The faceless, nondescript units are dubbed arbitrarily such labels as "Knight" and "Bishop" while their appearance reveals nothing to suggest these roles. To make matters worse, the units on both playable sides are entirely identical aside from a simple color palette swap...

Full article at http://home.uchicago.edu/~djm2/archives/sent.1999.04/chess

Same author as the other chess story linked to below, funnily enough.

you have read my sig
[ Parent ]

Yes, that's it! THANK YOU! [nt] (none / 0) (#42)
by pb on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:14:29 PM EST

"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
[ Parent ]
Needs new maps (4.73 / 19) (#20)
by Sze on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:25:48 AM EST

I'm so sick of playing every game on "English manor foyer". We need new tile sets. What happened to "country home tablecloth", "Stratego", and "lemon-lime"? What's the hold-up?

in game chat transcript... (4.43 / 23) (#21)
by bsimon on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 06:02:54 AM EST

in game chat transcript...

Ch3zzL0rd: LOL u teh sux0r!!!!!!!!!1!!
Pawn0graph1c: WTF!!! Bxf2 Qd2+!!!!
Kaspar0v: wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwsssssswwwwwwwadddddddd4
Pawn0graph1c: hax0r!!11
Kaspar0v: nice wallhack DeepBlu3...

you have read my sig

that type of humor got old (2.00 / 1) (#27)
by BankofAmerica ATM on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:52:44 AM EST

its not fucking funny... this somethingawful... using 1337 type shit. its fucking stupid and overdone.

[ Parent ]

You are so wrong... (3.00 / 0) (#28)
by bsimon on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 11:09:43 AM EST

K5ers are laughing so much they're barely able to reach their keyboards to give me a 5 rating. This link explains it all:


you have read my sig
[ Parent ]

"pawnographic" is pretty good (nt) (4.66 / 3) (#29)
by tps12 on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 11:32:12 AM EST

[ Parent ]
unfortunately... (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by Work on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 01:02:55 PM EST

just a few days ago I was accused of the wallhack thing on ET. these kids are everywhere.

[ Parent ]
sif (none / 0) (#66)
by Fuzzwah on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:24:47 AM EST

I love my sig.

The best a human can do is to pick a delusion that helps him get through the day. - God's Debris
[ Parent ]

PvP, crafting etc (4.54 / 11) (#22)
by StephenThompson on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 06:21:04 AM EST

I wouldn't call myself a "carebear" but sometimes i want to play without getting trounced by some kiddy while im just trying to get experience making pawn pyramids.  This game really needs an 'opt in' PvP system so I dont get clobbered everytime I play.  
Also, where's the crafting?  I mean you gotta have crafting, all the good games have it.  A whole economy could be created around clothing for the queen, king and bishop, armor for the pawns and barding for the horses.  It would add a whole new dimension to the game and get away from only being a battle oriented game.
Also there is the issue of player housing. Where is the player housing?  

+1 FP ROFLMFAO (3.40 / 5) (#30)
by Kasreyn on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 11:32:43 AM EST

One of the best send-ups I've seen recently of a games company I hate. Excellent work. =)


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
+1FP, I hate chess (3.20 / 5) (#32)
by b1t r0t on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 12:47:59 PM EST

(Who hoo! I gave it the 95!)

I wonder what this would be like if applied to Go. Probably the first thing they would do is add more types of pieces because having every stone be identical just isn't "exciting" enough and is unlikely to attract the 18-25 age group.

-- Indymedia: the fanfiction.net of journalism.

ding...first post on Go in this chess article. (5.00 / 2) (#59)
by Fen on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 09:26:05 PM EST

Slashdot is famous for some yahoo always mentioning Go in any chess article. Like damn clockwork.
[ Parent ]
And then... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
by b1t r0t on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 01:23:39 AM EST

And then like clockwork, some yahoo always bitches and moans about it?

-- Indymedia: the fanfiction.net of journalism.
[ Parent ]
You with your "go" and equality (5.00 / 3) (#64)
by Eater on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:10:36 AM EST

When will you learn that only a game with ridgid social stratification can truly mirror the real world? But no, besides being a mere mirror of social inequality, chess is also a mirror of real-world opportunity, where a lowly pawn can, upon stormy the enemy lines and tearing through the powerful clergy, rise to become a queen.


[ Parent ]
Bah, Go is so 2002. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
by dasunt on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:40:39 AM EST

Shogi has several advantages over Go. First, for the chess player, Shogi is more easily understood. Second, since it less well-known, it allows you to be an elite, exotic asshole. Third, it fulfills a slot in the Japanophile desire. (And Kanji tiles are damn cool).

Plus, games get the nice tit-for-tat end game aggressiveness going.

[ Parent ]
chess doesnt make money (2.21 / 14) (#34)
by turmeric on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 12:54:17 PM EST

blizzard is a corporation. its called capitalism. you might have heard of it.

btw im glad you brought this horrible thing to light. i cant imagine a more important topic for discussion than yet another whining rant about how 'stupid' an online game company is regarding rules.

Not had your coffee yet? (4.00 / 1) (#89)
by Fantastic Lad on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:09:00 AM EST

I have come to expect a somewhat higher grade of whatever it is you do around here. And quit slouching, mister. There's a war on!


[ Parent ]

pthpthpht! (4.20 / 5) (#36)
by Skywise on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 01:54:17 PM EST

I just wish Blizzard would get around to releasing a patch for my GeForce graphics card for this thing.  I don't know why I bothered paying $400 for a high and the thing still gives me 1 FPS!

Not to mention that the simulated wood grain on the bishop keep pixelating around his "hat".

Chess: Return of the Emperor (4.00 / 7) (#37)
by joecool12321 on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 01:57:02 PM EST

Our developers have been hard at work making this Chess expansion the best yet!

Increased board size! That's right, we've increased the already massive world of chess from 64 squares to 81 squares, an increase of over 25%! These new squares are only available to owners of Chess: Return of the Emperor

New character classes! Behold the awseome power of the new Emperor class. With over 25% more playing area, something needs to populate those new squares. The Emperor class will have the ability to appoint a new king if the old king dies. This class can be used only by owners of the new expansion, but is usable when playing aginst non-expanded users.

New move lists! Tired of playing pawns because of the repitative push forward? Chess: Return of the Emperor will allow players to move their pawns backwards as well as forwards.

And much, much more! These are only a few of the exciting new developments only available with Chess:Return of the Emperor, due out Christmas, 2004!

Variations (4.25 / 3) (#43)
by djotto on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:15:20 PM EST

The Emperor class will have the ability to appoint a new king if the old king dies.

Reminds me of a chess variation where you start out with two princes that are more flexible than queens. When one of the princes is taken, the other collapses into a king.

There are a lot of chess variations in history - different board sizes, different pieces (for example the elephant is a long knight (moves three forward, one left) which can't jump over other pieces), and of course in Russia it's a ship, not a rook.

It's something worth looking into - some of those variations are fun.

[ Parent ]
Wha? (4.00 / 2) (#65)
by Eater on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:12:33 AM EST

In Russia the bishop is an elephant and there is no ship.


[ Parent ]
Hmm (3.00 / 1) (#74)
by djotto on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 05:06:12 AM EST

I was told this by a Muscovite, so I'm not about to back down. Maybe there are some regional variations? Persuading Scoop to show Cyrillic characters is a pain in the ass, but...

Ладья (lad'ja) is listed as the Russian name for the rook, and the bishop, as you say, is слон (slon).

However, as I originally said, there are chess variations (Shatranj, Korean Chess) where the elephant is a different piece from the bishop that came to replace it in orthodox chess.

[ Parent ]
I apologize, I was indeed mistaken (3.00 / 1) (#76)
by Eater on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 06:34:20 AM EST

"slon" does mean elephant, so on that point I stand firm. As for the rook, it kind of slipped my mind that "ladja" is indeed a type of ship... it's just not a word that is really used to mean a ship anymore.


[ Parent ]
Ah, a Russian speaker (3.00 / 1) (#77)
by djotto on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 06:44:57 AM EST

Maybe you can answer a question for me, as everyone I know who speaks the language has abandoned ICQ for the summer.

My dictionary translates &#fcy; (ferz) as Queen, but looking at some of the other languages I think a more accurate translation might be "vizier" (as in Turkish)?

[ Parent ]
Pressed post, not preview (nt) (1.00 / 1) (#78)
by djotto on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 06:45:47 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Hmm... (4.00 / 2) (#111)
by Eater on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 05:35:00 AM EST

Well, ferz is definitely NOT queen, as it's a masculine noun and could not possibly refer to a female monarch or ruler. The word is not in common use outside of chess, and as I do not have a dictionary on hand (nor am I linguist), I can't tell you what it means, besides saying it's a chess piece. Sometimes, in Russian, the queen is indeed refered to as the queen, though traditionally the word ferz is used.


[ Parent ]
Can someone (4.42 / 7) (#38)
by Elkor on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 02:25:56 PM EST

Tell me where I can find the crack to Blizzard Chess that lets me modify the characters?

I exported some of the weapons from Warcraft and want to import them.

Thanks in advance,

"I won't tell you how to love God if you don't tell me how to love myself."
-Margo Eve
I heard there's a crack to (4.00 / 3) (#52)
by Skywise on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 06:17:15 PM EST

show the queen nekkid!

Without any clothes!

[ Parent ]

Wow! (5.00 / 5) (#54)
by joto on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:05:51 PM EST

Wow! Both nekkid, and without clothes?

Is it possible to see her in the nude as well? All undressed?

[ Parent ]

Just like the old days: (none / 0) (#86)
by odaiwai on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:04:33 AM EST

Is she petrified and does she resemble Natalie Portman?

dave "keeping the old jokes up past their bedtime"
-- "They're chefs! Chefs with chainsaws!"
[ Parent ]

The problem with that hack... (none / 0) (#97)
by ThePlague on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 01:41:08 PM EST

is that she is much more vulnerable to the hot grits attack.

[ Parent ]
It's Good To Be The King (3.50 / 2) (#99)
by Rand Race on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 02:34:10 PM EST

"King's prerogative! Three moves to your one.... yes!

"Knight, jump Queen!"

"Bishop, jump Queen!"

"Pawns, jump Queen!"

"Everybody jump the Queen.... GANG BANG!!"


"Everybody thank the Queen, she's been such a good sport."

"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there be one, He must approve the homage of Reason rather than that of blindfolded Fear." - Thomas Jefferson
[ Parent ]

Now I'm not a grandmaster... (2.00 / 5) (#39)
by tzanger on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 02:36:29 PM EST

But I'm pretty sure that queens cannot move like rooks...  

what? (3.00 / 0) (#40)
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 02:49:06 PM EST

the only think queens cannot do is move like kights. and of cource the king can not rook witht he queen.

[ Parent ]
hahaha I'm an idiot Rook != Knight [nt] (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by tzanger on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:23:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No, you most certainly are not [n/t] (5.00 / 2) (#63)
by Eater on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:04:58 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Starcraft? (4.14 / 7) (#41)
by Peaker on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 02:50:39 PM EST

Seems to me that this is about Blizzard's amazing game: Starcraft

In that case, it is mildly funny and somewhat analogous, but they did a really good job balancing Starcraft. The resulting product after many tweaks is still almost identical in strategies to the original game.

They didn't really change things that much.

A list of changes that I remmember is:

  • Dragoons cost 125 instead of 150
  • Academy costs 150 instead of 200
  • Spawning pool costs 200 instead of 150
  • Goliaths air-fire range increased from 4 to 5
  • Hatchery costs 300 instead of 350
  • Sunken colonies do much more damage than they originally did (they were indeed quite worthless before the change - which was a true mistake)

    And a few more changes I can't recall off the top of my head, nothing as huge as changing the initial positions, limiting queen movement, etc.

    Starcraft is by far the best online strategy game ever made, and wouldn't have been that way without those tweaks.

  • Boy are you out of the loop (3.16 / 6) (#44)
    by Silent Chris on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:26:12 PM EST

    Most people have moved onto WarCraft III.  For the past 1.5 years, Blizzard has been issuing patches nearly monthly to balance the game.  The expansion pack was a doozy: it totally changed the abilities of all units and changed the game from slower to faster paced.  In WarCraft III, there are also about 5 strategies for every 1 playable in Starcraft.  Get with teh program!!1  :P

    [ Parent ]
    Warcraft III (4.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Peaker on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 03:39:58 PM EST

    I tried it briefly, and it seemed to not even be close to the Starcraft greatness.

    Is it any good now? :)

    [ Parent ]

    yes. (none / 0) (#137)
    by Ryan Singer on Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 05:11:22 AM EST

    I love my WarIII. Try playing as the undead. Never before in a RTS game have I so enjoyed stripmining a map.-Ryan

    [ Parent ]
    A joke? (4.00 / 6) (#60)
    by RoubeLivro on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 09:47:48 PM EST

    I can only assume you are using sarcasm. Ask anyone who plays Warcraft III at a high level of play if Starcraft is not far more strategically complex.

    In short, Warcraft III is considered as awful by hardcore RTS players, under the shadow of Starcraft: Brood War.

    Disclaimer: I have played both at a high level of play.

    [ Parent ]

    You must be joking (1.00 / 3) (#98)
    by Silent Chris on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 02:11:16 PM EST

    Typical StarCraft strategy: go straight to tier 3.  Load up on carriers.  Don't bother playing any other race than Protoss -- no one else does.

    Typical WarCraft strategy: first, what race are you playing as?  All are pretty much equal (Night Elves were dominant before the expansion pack; now Undead have a slight lead).  Do you rush or turtle?  Tech your hero or mass units?  Every strategy has a counter, and there's no braindead situations where you're strugling to figure out how to kill 300 carrier ships at once.

    Then there's the world editor, which is light years ahead of StarCraft's.  It's just a better game.

    [ Parent ]

    Now I know you are joking (4.00 / 1) (#106)
    by RoubeLivro on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 09:38:15 PM EST

    "Typical StarCraft strategy: go straight to tier 3.  Load up on carriers.  Don't bother playing any other race than Protoss -- no one else does."

    Haha. This is probably the most retarded comment I've seen on Kuro5hin. Full marks for stupidity, but don't you think its a bit obvious?

    For those who are not aware, carriers is a fairly rare strategy which is quite risky, but sometimes done in Protoss vs Terran.

    What you say is partially true at the complete newbie level of play, as newbies will just sit in the base and build stuff.

    [ Parent ]

    my friend has a wonderful strategy... (none / 0) (#136)
    by CAIMLAS on Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 03:47:20 AM EST

    my friend has a wonderful strategy... he's beaten the best of the best with it on multiple occasions. It's basically a carrier rush, with a twist.

    It takes seven minutes for his first carrier, basically the amount of time for 3 or so marines. He'll block his base in with buildings, and let the heavier buildings take a little beating by those marines/lings/zealots while he gets his 2nd, 3rd, etc. carriers... meanwhile, he bombards any attacking units from behind the buildings. If the other guy isn't able to get through the buildings within the first couple minutes, then it's pretty much over.

    It's hillarious to see half a dozen carriers fly over a base that's got 1 or 2 un-seiged tanks, a couple hydras, or half a dozen zealots, and see the flood of complains, "he's cheating!"... and then they ally against my friend, and he still wins.

    Starcraft is indeed much more tactical than war3. I find TA a a bit too complex to truely be tactical, as well as there being way too many units to practically manage. starcraft makes a good medium.

    Socialism and communism better explained by a psychologist than a political theorist.
    [ Parent ]

    The goal (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by BlueTrin on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 11:12:57 PM EST

    they achieved with warcraft 3 was to make a newbie-friendly game. That's why they added autocast, made soft counters and reduced the number of units.

    If you don't trust me, it was said many times in some Bill Roper interviews even before warcraft III beta.

    Basically, even if you are truly better than someone else at playing war 3, the game will still be fairly long, soft counters, easy micromanagement (high HP with new armor system), in-base defenses, make the game incredible slow-paced and even if you are really better than someone else at this game, as long as he is not totally new, the game will last some time.

    "Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?"
    [ Parent ]
    blizzard (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by eudas on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 11:35:57 AM EST

    blizzard is all about maximizing sales, first, foremost, and always. anything that might inhibit that goal of showing management the money is summarily executed and evidence disposed of in the dark of night.

    that they still manage to make decent games is a testament to the quality of their employees, but their management is totally a bunch of money hungry whores, and by doing so they are throwing their brand down the toilet as they stab their customers in the back time after time by not supporting the communities that they create. they regard game communities as something to exploit to make more sales, not something to support to encourage FUTURE sales.

    oh well.

    "We're placing this wood in your ass for the good of the world" -- mrgoat
    [ Parent ]

    older but better (4.00 / 3) (#68)
    by m a r c on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 01:02:40 AM EST

    I like starcraft a lot better than warcraft 3.. reason is that w3 puts too much emphasis on the lead character which makes it less like an RTS and more like some dodgy adventure game.
    I got a dog and named him "Stay". Now, I go "Come here, Stay!". After a while, the dog went insane and wouldn't move at all.
    [ Parent ]
    and makes it too micromanaged (4.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Delirium on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 04:45:53 AM EST

    To really play well, you have to play the dodgy adventure game part (since it's so powerful), while also doing everything you already had to do in stracraft (manage all your units). This makes it way too micromanagement-intensive; you have to click ridiculously fast and use many hotkeys per second to even have a chance of playing competitively.

    [ Parent ]
    omg i hate micromanagement [n/t] (1.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Liet on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 07:41:36 AM EST

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (4.00 / 2) (#132)
    by RoubeLivro on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 08:01:31 PM EST

    Thats like saying that Chess is too hard, and you have to evaluate too many possibilities. The board size should be cut down to 3x3, and only two piece types used.

    [ Parent ]
    Even more than that... (none / 0) (#67)
    by obsidian head on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:55:36 AM EST

    I recall that the Zerg were considered insanely powerful at first, because people could really rush with them.  And Terrans were weak because all you can do with them at first is defend.  

    (No, they didn't add 2+2, seeing that if a Terran player defended well at first, she'd have an enormous tech advantage after the opponent was done spending all his resources rushing.)

    So they made Zergs laughably weak, throwing the game off when people started learning how to play the game... at least that it how I remember it.

    [ Parent ]

    Not at all (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by nusuth on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 05:45:18 PM EST

    Despite all the noise, there have never been a sure-kill cheeser tactic in SC. I won against and lost to, every race with every patch (gave up playing at 1.08 times) at every stage of the game.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm the bitter bitching Zerg player... (none / 0) (#93)
    by dasunt on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:45:41 AM EST

    Er, all Zerg structures have an additional cost of 50 since a drone is sacrificed for each structure.

    [ Parent ]
    Huh. You never played TA did you? (4.00 / 5) (#110)
    by thunderbee on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 03:29:15 AM EST

    Not to start a flame war or anything, but I'd like to point out that Total Annihilation still holds the ground. More units, a lot of different strategies, the ability to combine units in unforseen ways, and a modest PC configuration.
    My main gripe about the *craft is that they completely failed to integrate the good ideas of TA, or did so very slowly.
    TA now sells for peanuts; grab it (and the expansion pack, TA:CC) if you get a chance. The graphics are still ok, though not 3D of course; but the gameplay is unmatched.

    [ Parent ]
    Eh? (4.50 / 2) (#131)
    by RoubeLivro on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 07:57:16 PM EST

    Certainly it is an odd thing you say, and majority opinion of hardcore RTS gamers is very much not on your side for this opinion.

    Personally I find TA to be the second best strategy game made, but Starcraft outranks it strategically by a huge amount.

    [ Parent ]

    Re: Eh? (none / 0) (#144)
    by thunderbee on Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 03:58:32 AM EST

    Sorry for the delay in answering ;)

    Certainly it is an odd thing you say, and majority opinion of hardcore RTS gamers is very much not on your side for this opinion.

    Yes, I am very aware of that. I believe most people never played TA long enough to appreciate the vast choice of strategies offered by the diverity of units, and the always evolving games as players twist their "usual" gaming style to surprise each-other or adapt to the new threat.

    But then again, I know I'm going against the tide, and morever the game is now quite old and most people would not consider playing it because it doesn't require a GeForce4 with 128M ;)
    As I said, I'm not trying to start a flame war; maybe I'll just manage to get some players to try and like what I feel is an unjustly unknown game.

    [ Parent ]
    Nintendo Shougi! (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by bkhl on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 04:29:32 PM EST

    Many commenters seems to have the impression that there is a on true chess. In fact, chess has gone through these kind of changes as late as the 17th century or so. There are also other variants existing today, like Shougi and Xiangqi. The article is still funny, but in another way.

    I'm familiar with Xiangqi (5.00 / 5) (#49)
    by Blarney on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:35:32 PM EST

    Good old Elephant Game, I've played it and even made a board for it. Naturally my board was Westernized - it was a larger chessboard with pieces in the middle of the squares, rather than at the corners, with Western chess pieces for Car(Rook), Knight, Pawn, Elephant(Bishop), and King, with Guards consisting of Pawns glued onto the base of a Bishop for extra height, and with Pows consisting of Bishop heads glued on top of Rooks.

    Still, International Chess is a far different game. There is plenty of space and time in Xiangqi and all the other large-board Chess variants I've seen. However, International Chess is the tightest Chess of all. The board is very small, only 8x8, and the pieces have been increased in power over the past centuries. During the recorded history of International Chess, the Knight was given the ability to jump through any obstructions, the Pawn has acquired the 2-step privilege on the first move (with en passant provided to avoid disruptive consequences) - the Bishop has been given the range of the whole board - the Queen was given enormous abilities in the 14th Century - these incremental tweaks have all added to up to a very tightly balanced game, where the pieces are all just powerful enough and the board is just small enough for them to be in constant contact from the first move, yet allowing enough freedom for play.

    The other Chess games are like baseball, or football, or soccer. International Chess is like basketball - pieces fighting and stabbing like players dancing around each other on a half-court. It is very dense, and very finely balanced.

    [ Parent ]

    who gets laid less? (3.00 / 5) (#50)
    by zzzeek on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 05:47:23 PM EST

    chess nerds or blizzard nerds ?

    I don't know why... (3.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Skywise on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 06:19:00 PM EST

    But that suddenly made me think they could do DOA: Chess and probably pull it off...  At least as well as they did with Volleyball...

    [ Parent ]
    Duuude... (4.66 / 3) (#70)
    by Aighearach on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 01:47:37 AM EST

    You need to refine your strategy. Perhaps a good book on middlegame strategy would help you score more wins.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm both ... (none / 0) (#75)
    by anonimouse on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 05:43:36 AM EST

    ... and I get laid daily. Maybe its because I'm not a good chess or blizzard nerd
    Relationships and friendships are complex beasts. There's nothing wrong with doing things a little differently.
    [ Parent ]
    Re: who gets laid less? (none / 0) (#83)
    by YetAnotherDave on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 08:48:32 AM EST

    Well, I mostly play chess with female friends, which might seem like a point in favour of chess nerds, but I play it here...

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks for the link. [nt] (none / 0) (#141)
    by monkeymind on Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 10:23:49 AM EST

    Always looking for chess partners.

    I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people and assume the deserve it.
    [ Parent ]

    ICS? (none / 0) (#143)
    by Piquan on Sun Jul 20, 2003 at 07:42:58 PM EST

    I would suggest using ICS. A well-populated chess server, people (and a few bots, all marked) with a variety of skills (and ratings are maintained), lots of clients-- you can even use telnet if you want-- etc.

    [ Parent ]
    blizzard nerds (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by zymurge on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:04:37 AM EST

    Playing on battle.net is far less social than playing chess, even if your opponent is just another chess nerd. If the chess nerd only played online they might be about equal though.

    [ Parent ]
    What bothered me most about Blizzard patches (4.20 / 5) (#56)
    by proles on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:49:29 PM EST

    In games like Starcraft, at least, a patch doesn't matter that much.  I mean yes, if it totally changes game balance then you'll have to play a new strategy, but at least you can switch your styles relatively easily.

    In Diablo 2, though, patches can totally destroy characters and custom made/gemmed items.  People spend a lot of time to build these things up and then have them destroyed for "balance".  I advocated quite noisily for a time that with every patch that introduced a major skill change every character should have an option to reassign their skill points.  My pleading fell on deaf ears, though, so eventually the continual patching combined with the fact that the Bnet community is just a bit much to tolerate, I stopped playing D2 completely (and didn't even bother to sell my SoJs and such on eBay, oh well).

    Really, the patches combined with Bnet being sort of shifty have made it so I doubt I'll ever buy another Blizzard game (and I used to be pretty hardcore, was on the diabloii.net site years before it came out, preordered collector's edition, all that crap).
    If there is hope, it lies in the proles.

    Play Hardcore (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by JahToasted on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:19:24 AM EST

    That's why I play on hardcore. No stress about building up a character cuz you know its gonna die eventually. Just play, have fun, die, create a new char, have some more fun. It is kinda a drag when a PK stabs you in the back (that happened to me last time), but I find the game to be more fun overall, and you can be creative in building up you char. The knife throwing barb was pretty cool, even though he didn't last very long.
    "I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" -- Jim Morrison
    [ Parent ]
    I would agree entirely (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by proles on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 12:32:09 AM EST

    Were it not for the fact that a single lag spike can destroy months of work.  The hardcore community was (and I guess still is) generally much more respectable and serious and such than the "normal" folks, but at the same time a single lag spike can destroy all your work.  Much of the time I spent playing D2 was over a 33.6k modem and that made Hardcore impossible.  Even when I had a better connection, though, lag was still too much of an issue.
    If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
    [ Parent ]
    Actually I guess I should clarify (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by proles on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 12:33:40 AM EST

    Another aspect of my disagreement is the fact that I'm a bit of a perfectionist.  I play RPGs to try and build up the best characters I can.  Well, that's not the only reason I play them, I play them because they're fun, but that is generally my longterm goal.  And if the game is one where your character can die due to a technical blip that isn't even your fault, well, it's far too frustrating for me to deal with.  If you're fine with that (and have the attitude that your character will "die eventually" anyway) then fair enough.
    If there is hope, it lies in the proles.
    [ Parent ]
    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by JahToasted on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 03:09:19 PM EST

    Well I had all my characters deleted on 2 separate ocassions because I didn't log in in over 3 months. Pretty stupid of me, huh? Anyways, at first I wasn't too happy over it and thought like you did... Damn I had a lvl 56 barb with some really awesome stuff and now its gone forever. All that work gone...

    But then I realised, hey, its only a game. It shouldn't be work. If you aren't having fun just playing the game, then why are you playing? Yeah the lag spikes suck, but that just gives you an opportunity to start a new char.

    So I've found Diablo2 to be much more fun if I approach as an arcade game and not an RPG. The PK wankers I could do without though.
    "I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" -- Jim Morrison
    [ Parent ]

    pwipes and d2 (none / 0) (#117)
    by eudas on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 04:03:04 PM EST

    my chars are prolly all gone too.

    back when i played MUDs, they would do pwipes; that is, 'player wipes', where all characters (and therefore equipment/levels/etc) were deleted.

    d2 on battle.net could use that desperately; it would teach people how to play the GAME and not just how to play their equipment. they get too attached to their eq; eq is just finding MF and then killing lots of things.

    there are so many people that find playing untwinked more fun, it's sad that more people don't do it. regular pwipes shows you who really knows how to play the game.

    "We're placing this wood in your ass for the good of the world" -- mrgoat
    [ Parent ]

    For sure (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by JahToasted on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 07:24:08 PM EST

    If I didn't have my chars deleted I'd probably still be using them. But playing different characters has let me try different strategies, use different weapons, etc.
    "I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" -- Jim Morrison
    [ Parent ]
    They needed to take the Descent approach (4.00 / 1) (#130)
    by RyoCokey on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 03:13:14 PM EST

    I.e. character couldn't take damage when packets weren't flowing.

    "During election times, we tend to lose our grandmothers, grandfathers and young children. They just disappear. But I want to warn you all that you should
    [ Parent ]
    You forgot this: (4.78 / 14) (#57)
    by acceleriter on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 07:55:24 PM EST

    We and our parent company have initiated civil and criminal action under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act against the authors of GNU Chess, which infringes on Blizzard's intellectual property by copying our game design, graphics, and proprietary protocol.

    Actually (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by Silent Chris on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 04:16:18 PM EST

    The lawsuit would more likely be against neighborhood chess tournaments that don't accurately check if their contestants are using official "Blizzard boards".  Blizzard could care less if you hack the game.  They freak out when you hack battle.net.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually . . . (4.00 / 1) (#120)
    by acceleriter on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 07:37:20 PM EST

    the filthy, DMCA-wielding, jackboot-wearing, scumsucking purveyors of Whorecraft have done both. There was the bnetd suit that you allude to, and the C&D against Freecraft, whose sin was to copy gameplay and design. (Guess it's OK when Blizzard does it--cough, Westwood, cough.)

    [ Parent ]
    The problem with Freecraft (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Silent Chris on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 07:43:59 PM EST

    Is that a lot of people were using the art of WarCraft illegally.  They had an built-in tile set that very few people used.  Using WarCraft's art would've been ok if most people had WarCraft already -- but a lot didn't.  Therefore, they were getting art for free, and that's a big no-no.

    [ Parent ]
    But the Freecraft people (4.50 / 2) (#122)
    by acceleriter on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 07:50:55 PM EST

    weren't distributing the art.

    [ Parent ]
    In other news... (4.20 / 5) (#58)
    by wrinkledshirt on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 08:58:25 PM EST

    Blizzard Checkers, Blizzard's first foray into RTS board games, should be available for the Mac sometime in the next quarter.

    should be in the humour section (2.16 / 6) (#61)
    by collideiscope on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 10:33:40 PM EST

    Hope is a disease. Get infected.
    also known as the (2.00 / 1) (#62)
    by President Saddam on Sun Jul 13, 2003 at 11:23:16 PM EST

    'lame attempt to be funny ' section.

    Allah Akbar
    [ Parent ]

    what (none / 0) (#73)
    by Delirium on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 04:49:11 AM EST

    It is in the humor category.

    [ Parent ]
    From the 'Strike-That, Reverse-it' Dept. (4.00 / 2) (#71)
    by thadk on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 03:19:39 AM EST

    Real Life: The Full Review

    Real life has good graphics but the gameplay sucks (none / 0) (#81)
    by EMHMark3 on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 07:43:10 AM EST

    [n/t] (bleh not enough space to put it in subject line heh)

    T H E   M A C H I N E   S T O P S
    [ Parent ]

    True. Not enough save points. (none / 0) (#82)
    by porkchop_d_clown on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 07:58:26 AM EST

    And no "undo" feature!

    His men will follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiousity.

    [ Parent ]
    There are save points? Where? (3.50 / 2) (#116)
    by Quattri on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 03:34:44 PM EST

    What cheat codes are you on? ;-)
    JGP, a.k.a. Quattro, a.k.a. Quattri

    To email me, delete the ``removeme'' phrases dispersed into both the username AND the domain. One letter of ``removeme'' is placed after each real character.
    [ Parent ]
    Their called "churches" (3.00 / 2) (#128)
    by porkchop_d_clown on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 09:40:21 AM EST

    At least, this guy I know *claims* his church is a "save point".

    His men will follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiousity.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, its boring as hell. [nt] (none / 0) (#88)
    by zymurge on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:06:23 AM EST

    [ Parent ]
    The balance sucks too. (none / 0) (#140)
    by RebelWithoutAClue on Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 05:41:27 PM EST

    Just look at all the superpowered characters running around. You know, Dubya, Billy G. ....

    [ Parent ]
    This would be funny if it weren't for the fact (4.00 / 1) (#80)
    by porkchop_d_clown on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 07:41:44 AM EST

    that the rules of chess have, in fact, changed repeatedly thru history; and there are (in fact) several popular variants to regulation chess. The queen herself began as just such a variant before being incorporated into the standard rules.

    Some of my favorite variations include mapping the board to a cylinder and converting the board into a true 3d space (true 3d, not 3 level "star trek" chess...)

    His men will follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiousity.

    That isn't the reason this isn't funny. nt (none / 0) (#94)
    by Keith Harper on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 11:47:15 AM EST

    [ Parent ]
    I prefer nuke chess (none / 0) (#102)
    by bashibazouk on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 04:33:13 PM EST

    Standard rules but at the start of each players turn , that player throws two 8 sided dice. If there is a piece in the square referenced by the dice, it's gone. An exception for except the king. If the king gets hit, all pieces in the surrounding squares are toast.

    [ Parent ]
    You forgot to add (3.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Silent Chris on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 12:53:12 PM EST

    "The expansion pack will completely change the dynamics of the game so you have to be even more quick-fingered and l33t than the 12-year olds you're playing against than ever before."  At least, that's what they've done with WarCraft.

    This chess expansion pack... (3.33 / 3) (#103)
    by rmn on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 04:35:32 PM EST

    Does it have new areas to explore? I think I've been to all the regions in the original game.

    Also, will I be able to use my veteran pieces from Chess in Chess 2.0?


    In other news (3.00 / 1) (#105)
    by mmsmatt on Mon Jul 14, 2003 at 09:34:59 PM EST

    In a shameless attempt to rake in mega-bucks on the hugely popular "chess" game, Blizzard is parterning with Warner Bros to produce "Chess Reloaded" and "Chess Revolutions".

    Due to the fact that Warner Bros refuses to not repeat a previous mistake, a free demo of "Legitimately Blonde Checkers 2" will be bundled with every copy.

    Does anyone remember (4.00 / 1) (#112)
    by salsaman on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 08:27:24 AM EST

    Back in the day, there used to be a T.V. console game called either 'Space Chess' or 'Star Chess' (I forget which now).

    As I recall, having only played it once, it was like a regular chess game, except that it had two special moves.

    Instead of moving a piece, you could warp it. If you warped it, it would disappear from the board for up to 4 turns, and then reappear at the same spot, possibly capturing a piece.

    It was also possible for some pieces to shoot each other, but I forget exactly how that worked.

    Oh, oh, oh I remember it .... (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by craigtubby on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 11:30:45 AM EST

    The shooting was the best bit.  Basically each piece had a number of shields, starting with pawns having 1, and Queens having 7/8 (the king was indestructable I think) and each piece could shoot where ever it could move.  So you could have a bishop at one end of the board shooting at pawns in safety.  Once shield were exhausted the final shot would "kill" the piece.

    There was also a "recharge" point, where the king and queen start off that allowed one shield to be recharged per turn while a piece was sitting on it.

    I think the rules were you could shoot once per turn as well as move.

    We used to play it so with a rule of not being able to take pieces, only shoot at them.

    try to make ends meet, you're a slave to money, then you die.

    * Webpage *
    [ Parent ]

    Compute! Magazine had a cool version (3.00 / 1) (#127)
    by porkchop_d_clown on Wed Jul 16, 2003 at 09:39:13 AM EST

    called "laser chess" where the pieces were mirrors, the king was a laser and the goal was to shoot the other king...

    His men will follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiousity.

    [ Parent ]
    Lunch Chess (1.50 / 2) (#114)
    by mjrauhal on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 12:26:35 PM EST

    Just thought I'd drop a note pointing to my Chess / Lunch money crossover rules in the hopes that it'll be entertaining for some of you :)

    (A quick summary for those not familiar with Lunch Money: Captures and checkmate are replaced with Lunch Money card combat.)

    Please ... (2.00 / 3) (#124)
    by BlueTrin on Tue Jul 15, 2003 at 11:03:40 PM EST

    Dear Blizzare,

    I haf been a long customah or yur games. Although I considere buyinh yur last exp pack, I would lik to adress yu an issu about yar gam:

  • Smurfers: people keep crating new acounts and I dun't like to be basht each gam wif 'GG NOOB NO RE THX'

  • Smurfers: i want to say that i play random so i aint biaset like othar, but black side r insanely powarful and ovarpowared. Pleas consider nerfing it

  • Smurfers: I think that (and many others do, I ve done a very serious poll on www.chessreplays.com and even balla agreed wif me), the ultimat for whit king, death r decay, r too powerful. One game, he cum into my base and he killt me so that is insanely overpowared. Plz blizzard nerf it too

  • 1337h4x0rd00d aka m4st4Burn1n4t0r

    Solo:Ranked 889th on the first 15 minutes

    Random Teams:Ranked 569th(but that's becuz I'm always teamed wif newbs)

    "Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?"
    Has anyone emailed this to Buzzard yet? (none / 0) (#133)
    by Kasreyn on Thu Jul 17, 2003 at 05:30:48 PM EST

    If not, I plan to. I mean, they won't care, but it might give one of their lower level underlings a chuckle.


    "Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
    We never asked to be born in the first place."

    R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
    If you don't like how Chess is balanced... (none / 0) (#134)
    by craigd on Thu Jul 17, 2003 at 07:06:51 PM EST

    then play a different kind.

    Shatranj, for insatnce, is easily learnable to those familiar with standard chess. Indeed, the current standard evolved out of an attepmt to speed up the game of Shatranj.

    Or Xiangqi, a Chinese relative of Chess with enough similarities for the basic thought required to be the same but enough differences to require the tactics to be different. I much prefer to play Xiangqi, personally.

    Or, indeed, play this new form. It isn't like the FIDE rules are something to be worshipped; unless you're into competitive chess they are just a means to have a good time, and maybe the best way for you is to change them.

    A man who says little is a man who speaks two syllables.

    Siamese Chess (none / 0) (#135)
    by Mathemagician on Thu Jul 17, 2003 at 11:21:36 PM EST

    I ran into an interesting chess game in junior high. It worked like this: you would gather 4 people, and you would play two mostly separate games of chess. If you were white, you were teamed up with the black player on the other board. Whenever you captured a piece, you would give it to your teammate. Then your teammate, in addition to doing a standard chess move, could choose to place one of the pieces you gave him on the board. I think there were some restrictions on placement (something to do with being in check), but I don't remember what they were.

    There was also a board game called Quantum Chess, which really was an expansion of chess. I never got to play it though :(

    its called bughouse. great game nt (none / 0) (#142)
    by relief on Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 09:25:32 PM EST

    If you're afraid of eating chicken wings with my dick cheese as a condiment, you're a wuss.
    [ Parent ]
    EA Chess (3.00 / 3) (#138)
    by skintigh on Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 03:59:50 PM EST

    EA Chess: Generals
    Based 100% on C&C: Generals

    Dec 2002:
    First a big "thank you" to all beta testers for your help.  
    Some of you have complained that since buying Westwood and the Chess line we have shut down all previous WW Chess ladders and forums.  This was done to better serve the customer.
    Some testers have brought it to my attention that all loses can be avoided by pressing "alt-f4."  This will be addressed by release of the game.  Also, it has been discovered that telling pawns to move too many spaces causes them to die, and upgrading pawns to a queen results in a piece with even less power than a pawn.  This too will be fixed by release.  EA Chess will be released next month.

    Jan 2003:
    There have been many troubles with network support, including: direct connect games only working on LANs and not across nets, internet games not working through firewalls or routers due to EA Chess's use of random ports, as well as constant connection problems, slow servers and frequent disconnections and mismatches during game play.  These will all be addressed before release, as well as all bugs mentioned in last month's message.  Thank you for your help.  

    Feb 2003:
    EA Chess has been released and is available in stores tomorrow.  People who pre-ordered the game will receive it within a week of tomorrow.  Also, the add-on pack that was supposed to be shipped with pre-orders was not shipped with them, but can be obtained at stores if you buy the game there.  We were not able to fix any of the pending bugs or network problems, nor any of the newly discovered bugs, but a patch will be out soon.  Also, we realize the servers have ground to a halt already, but we will fix that soon.  Also, we realize the ladder we promised still does not exist, but it will soon.  We also realize external ladders are impossible as we allow any number of users to use the same name.  Sorry.  Also, the feature about using different grandmaster strategies skills we kept hyping is not included in the game.

    Mar 2003:
    Patch 1.1 fixes several issues, including: misspellings, and the color of one of the chess boards.  Network problems can be fixed as described in the faq.

    Patch 1.2 fixes some balance issues.  People who prefer pawn strategies were hindered by several bugs and lost most games, so we have balanced the game by allowing pawns to only move one space at a time.  Also it has come to our attention the network work-around in the faq does nothing.  This will be fixed in the next patch.

    Patch 1.3 addresses balance problems with pawn-pushers.  After the last patch their win percentage dropped from 30% to 15%, so to compensate we are nerfing queens and rooks.  Also, it has come to our attention the faq was deleted, it will be restored soon.  Network and alt-f4 will be fixed in the next patch.

    April 2003:
    Patch 1.4 fixes some more misspellings and some balance issues.  Network fixes will be in the next patch.

    Patch 1.5 fixes some more bugs in game play, but none of the ones I have mentioned so far, nor the 70+ bugs now listed in the forum by a user.  Network game play will be fixed in the next patch.

    May 2003:
    Just to clarify, "Direct Connect" game play was never meant to be used across the Internet.  Sorry for the confusion.  Internet game play will be fixed next week.  Also, the 85 bugs catalogued by users in the forum are being looked at.

    June 2003:
    There has been complaint that almost every game still ends in disconnection or mismatch, and there are many cheats available on the web.  Disconnection will be fixed with network play in the next patch which will be out next week.  Also, to address the 102 bugs mentioned in the forum, the following is not a bug: bishops are supposed to pass through fellow pieces.

    July 2003:
    The network patch will be out next week.  Also, we are looking into the 115 bugs mentioned in the forums, and the cheats, and alt-f4 plague, and we are working hard an making a ladder.

    Update: The patch is tested and will be out next week

    Update: The patch is tested and will be out next week

    Update: The patch is tested and will be out next week

    We are releasing a expansion pack!  Features include: network play, grandmaster strategy skills, new units and our continuing promise of superior support!

    Download? (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by Iscariot on Fri Jul 18, 2003 at 04:25:45 PM EST

    Like... where can I see screenshots or download this? You'd think it'd be in the article.

    Gravity chess (none / 0) (#145)
    by fuchikoma on Tue Jul 22, 2003 at 06:04:16 PM EST

    (I guess only iRO players will get this, but...)

    Hello, this is iGC GM team.

    Due to error found in ~^Rook&^ piece, it has been removed for now. Please do not report this to GM team. We are working on the problem it will be fixed soon.

    In the mean time, ~^Bisthop&^ piece can move horizontally and vertically as well to rebalance game without ~^Rook.&^ Also, 2x points are score when capturing ~^Bisthop&^ piece.

    Thank you for your understanding.

    iGC GM Team
    Grav!ty Interactive, LLC.

    Hello this is iGC GM team.

    Grav!ty Event!

    For inconvenience of one week %@No Rook%^ problem, from 2003-07-25 to 2003-08-02 all pieces have %@2x Move Speed!%^ All pieces can move 2x distance with the optional usage!

    Thank you for your cooperation.

    iGC GM Team
    Grav!ty Interactive, LLC.

    Blizzard Chess | 145 comments (135 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden)
    Display: Sort:


    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
    See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
    Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
    Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
    My heart's the long stairs.

    Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!