What other variants should be added to chess?

@Toscani said in #29:

@nadjarostowa
How about inventing your own ideas

I don't think there is much need to change.

instead of criticizing and trying to shame others publicly.

No shaming going on. But if people post what seems nonsense ideas, I sometimes point that out.

Don't squish others down to raise your self in public view.

I have absolutely no intention of doing this.

I realized after playing a game with the thought of exchanging a piece to increase my clock, I would have to give more time to the sacrifices made to help compensate for the material loss.

You do see that all this makes no sense, don't you? The dynamics of the position, the pressure, the vastly different situations in which captures occur... it just makes no sense. It only makes the game less predictable, more random. It greatly takes away from the elegance of the game.

The invention of the clock is what caused the issues that chess has today.

Sorry, what "issue" are you talking about?

The clock race is the wrong approach for chess. It's like using a car to drive over water and a boat to float on pavement.

Clock race? I do not understand what you mean. The currently dominant Fischer bonus time controls are pretty much ideal in many regards. It feels like you are determined to dumb-down the game?!

I made a variant called Potent Knight Chess (at https://www.chessvariants.com/rules/potent-knight-chess) which gives the Knights an extra non-capturing diagonal step but is otherwise the same as normal Chess. This allows two Knights to force mate.

Here is a puzzle involving these enhanced Knights.

White to move and mate in 5. There are two White Potent Knights (Knight + non-capturing diagonal step) on d2 and f3. The White King is on g3 and the Black King is on h1.

@Nordlandia said in #30:

Now that we're on the subject, what's the reason Lichess doesn't choose to go for other possible time formats?

So what are you missing (that makes sense online)?

There is Bronstein delay, which is only used in the US if I remember correctly, and is mostly superseded by Fischer bonus nowadays. They are also pretty similar in practical terms. Having both would add confusion but little value, and it needs more complex UI, as you need to show the countdown timer as well.

Then there is hour glass... I have seen it available somewhere else, and nobody used it. Nobody plays it locally, although the clocks allow it. It's pretty unpredictable in regards to the length of the game.

Adding a second or third time control in classical? I doubt there is a demand for that online.

@RubixOne said in #32:

I made a variant called Potent Knight Chess (at https://www.chessvariants.com/rules/potent-knight-chess) which gives the Knights an extra non-capturing diagonal step. This allows two Knights to force mate.

This is all fun and good, but there dozens of different fairy chess pieces available. So the number of different kinds of "chess" is huge.

And this basically kills it. The more variety you have, the less people per variant. No variant is something special.

You just end up with having hundreds or thousands of very loosely related games.

The reason we still play chess today after hundreds of years is that the rules have stayed (mostly) the same.

You don't make something great by adding variants over variants. You just make it meaningless.

too much variants kill the game. trust me . there are lot of examples out there for this

Chess is like a baby. A variant over a variant. It has not finished growing, even if some think the standard we presently have will remain as is for the rest of our lives. Change is unavoidable. AI era is here. The old clock ways was fine like a card punch to go to work and leave work. Now AI can be better than a card punch clock system.

Time controls have always been arbitrary. AI can make them smarter.

@Toscani said in #36:

Time controls have always been arbitrary. AI can make them smarter.

And how? Note that the clock should be somewhat predictable.

Also, you cannot use any information from the AI about the game, or it would be a huge giveaway in terms of evaluation.

And the proposed changes so far don't need any AI at all.

Quite tiresome to always see those "AI can make this better", and then when asked "How?" there never is a good answer.

I propose implementing variable time controls for paired players based on their ratings.

Stronger players could receive slightly less time, as their chess insights indicate they calculate moves more quickly. In contrast, lower-rated opponents (who tend to play more slowly, according to their insights) could get additional time as compensation for their reaction speed. This idea could complement the network lag compensation, but be tailored to each player's chess profile.

A time control proportional to rating could provide a meaningful variant. At the start of each game, the clocks could be automatically adjusted based on the players' rating difference. To further balance the odds, the site would enforce "berserk" mode for much higher-rated players, when the rating gap exceeds 500 points.

Simply enforcing berserk mode or adjusting the proportion of time removed according to rating differences would create an appropriate next variant for Lichess. Slow, incremental changes seem easier to implement.

So you want to tweak the game so that stronger players have less of an edge. This is fun and good practice for casual play, but unusable in general play:

1. It messes heavily with the rating system. As an extreme, if you adjust the clocks so much that the chances are now even, the ratings of the two players will be the same in the long term. In fact, all players will be rated the same. If you do it more moderately, it will still compress the ratings massively.

2. You would punish strong players for being strong, making becoming a better player a less relevant goal. You are thinking slowly - why improve on that? Just let the system give you more time.

3. You create a massive incentive for sandbagging.

Honestly, copying old masters is pointless, like spending all your time on the Sicilian Defense. Times change, and I don't want to be like those old players or get as obsessed with the game as Alekhine. I'm not into repeating what the old guys did, dedicating their lives merely to classical chess; that's just not my thing.

I don't see any interest in studying branch by branch of the Sicilian system in an era where computers dominate to such an extent.

@nadjarostowa I reckon if the hourglass thingy's set right, the games won't drag on forever.