Author: Daniel Shawul
Date: 08:30:49 03/24/04
Hi Is it too costy to add checks only for captures in quiescent. In my engine non capture checks decrease nps significantly.May be it is because it is hard [at least for me] to generate only checking moves.But the capture checks seem to work good in test suites and practically no decrease in nps in actual play.Has any one have the same experience. Another completely different question. Can attack tables efficently replace the conventional SEE routine. Ed says in his paper he uses a table look up scheme to find hanging pieces. But what about pinned attackers? [which the conventional SEE handles well]. Also i can't see how a table indexed by the two 8-bit variables give an approximation of the SEE outcome. for example if rebel's wb[sq] = 110 11000 [3 white attacks by pawns and knights]. How do i know whether it is 2 pawns and 1 kinght or 2 kinghts and a pawn attacking the square? I think using this method for see will make the already inaccurate SEE worse. Am i right? daniel
This page took 0.01 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.