Clearly beat your opponent

clearly beat your opponent

game is a tie

This is bullshit.

I'd have won a long time ago if there was a way to parry when my opponent tried to capture my pieces.

Faggot.

doesn't queen to 8b win

I mean 7b

You are assuming it's black's move.
If it is white's then it is a stalemate.

It's a queen bro, not a knight.

White is to move, but he has no legal moves. It's a stalemate.

no lol its stalemate because it's whites turn

das racist

noooooo you can't change the rules you'll ruin the purity of the game!

sumo is older than this shit and still gets it's rules tweaked every once in a while

make your objective impossible to complete

A draw is generous, playing like a retard should count as a loss

if you can't legally move your king, then you lost

If you can't checkmate your opponent's king, you lost

kek

his king will be checkmated once he has to move it into the path of my queen

facts

once he has to move it into the path of my queen

That's against the rules, retard. Why was that your plan?
You did have a plan, right? You weren't just making random moves like a retard, right?

Endgame Knight > Endgame Queen

yes, so he loses
if he doesn't make a move, he loses since you have to make a move when it's your turn
but when he makes the move, he loses since it's an illegal move
i accept your concession

Xir game allows draws

Xir game allows stalemates

RETVRN

enemy king not in check

make it so the enemy can't take their turn

can't ever put their king in check

lose

WOOOOOOOW

what move led to this position?

If you worked your opponent down to only having a king while you have a queen available and still manage to let him stalemate, you deserve the loss for being an idiot.

if you let your opponent stalemate you while you have a queen you are a monkey

Ka8, Qc7 ofcourse, retard

Explain how forcing an enemy to make a poor move is genius strategy except when it would cause them to lose that turn, when it suddenly becomes a bad one? Don’t you see how that’s an extremely stupid interpretation of the rules? Every other game I know of, if you play yourself into a corner and have no legal moves that means YOU lose.
A stalemate should only occur when both sides can only make legal moves in a loop forever.

I fucking hate chess

Move pawn up

Enemy moves their pawn up

Start planning ahead what to do

Enemy suddenly moves their knight and fucks up your pawn

Can't answer cuz there's no pawns to take him

Enemy moves their bishop and kills my Knight I haven't even moved yet

WTF.jpeg

Realize it's game over now that my pieces are getting torn apart

Checkmated

Games like chess are exactly why I play videogames.
I'd like to see you move to e5 when I have that entire place laced with mines and 5 sniper squads watching that spot.

get game to the point where the ability to win or draw is entirely up to you

decide to draw

A lot of king and pawn endgames would be less interesting if it weren't for stalemate.

playing a solved game

Lol
Lmao

Chess is literally retarded. News at 11.

holy brainlet mother of skill issue

Low IQ, but based reply.

can't even move the black pawn at all w/o it getting jumped

What racist bullshit is this.

post your elo + hands

Stalemates exist to keep pawns from becoming the most valuable piece otherwise the person with the most pawns at endgame automatically wins.

thinking elo matters especially with swarms of brown stockfish cheaters infesting games

GO is better in every single way

Damn E33 really mindbroke you didn't it

get into checkmate

refuse to move my king

we're stuck here for eternity

also technically Shogi works like that but honoraburu nip always forfeits the match before losing

what if they kill your king

Mindbroke? More like removed the scales from my eyes.
I now see clearly that strategy is meaningless without skill and reflex. It's incredible how the solution was so simple and even tried, but never fully explored in depth. Turn-based games are "solved" and I expect we'll see a huge shift towards skill-turn-based as more people do R&D to find the most fun ways to combine the two seemingly incompatible genres.

So he loses you pedantic fuck
Kill yourself

The game only ends if someone concedes or their king is mated, and it goes into an auto-draw if both players repeat their moves too many times.
Learn to prioritize piece combinations that can actually mate.

moves my black kween to A5

stalemate this homo

it also ends if you run out of time. As you have no legal moves you have no choice but to sit there until your time runs out and you lose.

Back when i lived on the island wageslaving i was playing 10+ chess games a day and gaining elo rapidly and i felt amazing
I lost my apartment and had to come back to america to live with my mom, now i dont have any motivation to play and feel kinda dead
Blogpost over

Not all games are timed, but true.

personally I really lose my motivation to play if I can't find anyone to play with otb

Is Chess the peak midwit game? Even the top tier players are petty assholes who seethe at the very concept of creativity. See Magnus treating Hans as a disgraced cheater for countering his moves.

Never played chess
So the game objective is not only kill the opponent's king but also make said king doesn't kill himself?

That IS bullshit.
If a player cannot make any legal move, that player should immediately lose.

Chess never recovered from the moment when humans lost the ability to beat computers.

If you've ever played a turn based game after Final Fantasy 1 you'd know that developers have long since toyed with the concept of true turn based with no time limits being inherently flawed because you get infinite time to calculate perfect moves. Final Fantasy itself evolved into a battle system where taking too long in a turn essentially gets yours skipped, for example. Neither you nor the E33 team have come up with anything new here.

The objective is to threaten to kill the opponent's king in a way that can't be avoided. You do this by setting up no-go zones with your other pieces since a king can't step into a square where he is threatened.

The issue with the situation in OP is because chess has autistic rules about draws, one of which is that a game where the turn player cannot make any moves at all while his king is NOT threatened is a draw (when all common sense says it should be a game loss instead).

The rules clearly state you can not move your king into check(mate). If you create a situation where your opponent has no legal moves, it makes sense the game would end in a draw.

This as a stalemate condition is a means to escape in this situation. If White is somehow manage to get Black into this scenario, then Black is clearly such a retard that he doesn't deserve the win. That's why its a stalemate.

it's simpler and more intuitive to have your opponent lose if they're trapped. imagine if you had a busted game of surrounding your opponent's king with the overwhelming might of 9 queens but because you weren't paying attention you lose your superiority because their king could do nothing but stand still. it's a nonsense rule that shouldn't exist in the first place

Chess should just end on king capture.
Far more intuitive and fixes all these problems instantly.

This is bullshit.

It is and was likely only added because of royalty

Its time you stopped playing baby games