Author: Tony Werten
Date: 02:44:27 07/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 28, 2001 at 18:47:21, Ron Murawski wrote: > >I have implemented a pin bitboard for king-pinned >pieces and it has helped the strength of my program. >My question is: Is it worthwhile to identify ALL >pinned pieces? Ignore all. It is not a starting engine issue. You'll be adjusting it every time you make some changes. The state you're engine is at now you should leave it up to quiescence to determine wether a piece can or cannot capture. Thre is lots of basic stuff you still have to solve. Don't go into details to early. TSCP and Gerbil are examples showing that just doing the basics but doing it good still gives a strong program. cheers, Tony > >Whereas the king-pinned pieces were quite easy to >determine and very important to the scoring, any >queen-pinned, etc. pieces will take much longer to >calculate and have less effect. In fact, some of the >pins seem to be phantoms as they might disappear >because of possible checking moves, tactical threats, >etc. > >Is it better to discover these pinned pieces in the >search, or is it better to do all the additional >processing in the evaluator? Has anyone tried >implementing the detection of all pinned pieces and >was the time spent looking for these pieces worth the >effort? > >Thanks in advance, >Ron Murawski
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.