Author: Dan Honeycutt
Date: 10:23:34 08/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 2004 at 12:33:47, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On August 15, 2004 at 10:42:46, Dan Honeycutt wrote: > >>On August 15, 2004 at 10:25:43, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >> >>>So what makes a program more aggressive? >>> >>>Better king safety? >>> >>>Points for control or occupation of square near the enemy king? >>> >>>I've tried obvious things and never been satisfied with the >>>aggression-level. >> >>Asymmetrical king safety. Program needs to not mind moving a piece which >>shelters it's own king to a position that menaces the enemy king. >> >>Dan H. > >This morning I bumped up the tropism rewards significantly and shored >up when they kick in (after opening (defined as 30% or more of the material >traded off, or after that side developed or after that side castled). The next >game I played I was crushed in <20 moves with a kingside attack. I know that feeling well. My first feeble attempt at king safety was just some pawn shelter. Against agressive programs like Phalanx those <20 move losses were routine. When I implemented Ed's approach that put a halt to those. I still lose, but not in such a rapid spectacular fashion. Dan H. > >Since I do not have attack tables, I use pcsq (poor man's attack) as >it does ultimately reward having a piece on square but one ply later. > >Some day I will go to evaluation and attack tables, probably bitboard it >all, but for now I have fun without the pain. > >Stuart
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.