[frading]

Yes, someone else here mentioned the four color theorem, and that gave me a few ideas to improve that.

For the demo, it actually opens up when you start the game. But it's possible to skip it, which is totally fair, I should have expected that. I'll make the button more obvious, you're absolutely right that it's too hidden at the moment.

> knight forks are probably more OP than a bunch of blinkstackers with infinite APM

There are too many words I don't understand here to infer your meaning. The knight forks I know are when a knight threatens the king and another piece, but it looks like you mean something else. It could be related to what I mentioned with multiple diagonals, although that does not affect knights. And OP is probably not original poster. And I don't know what bindstackers or APM are (maybe Actions Per Minute?).

But it does look like you know more about chess than I do, so I'd love to absorb that knowledge.

[gus_massa]

> There are too many words I don't understand here to infer your meaning.

Sorry, I watched too many videos of StarCraft 2. OP means Over Powered, i.e. an strategy that is imposible to beat.

% years ago, Google made an AI bot to play StarCraft 2, and they made a demo against two proffesional players. The bot was "cheating" so the bot has vision of the whole map, and the bot could make as many "clicks with the mouse" as it wants (APM "action per minute").

The bot discovered an estrategy that was to create some robots with lasers "stalker" that can shoot from a distance, so many of them can atact the same unit. And use an upgrade "blinck" so they can teleport a short distance. So the bot could make all of them atack and pick the hurt units and teleport to the back so the heal while continue atacking.

A human can only manage 5 or 10 of them together, and there is a high chance of forgeting to send one to the back. The bot used like 30 of them, atacking from different angles.

There is a video with clips of the game. The most clear fight were the bot (in blue) use the trick is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EQAsrfUIyo&t=510s

---

I tried the demo. The default player is too weak. It makes too many silly mistakes. The harder players is hard. I'll try again tomorrow.

(The bishops that bounce against the walls when there is a corner with 3 squares in the border are weird. Also, bishops are too easy to block by "walls". I like knights better.)

[frading]

ah yes, that's a bit clearer now :) And I'm glad that I used to play starcraft before google decided to be involved.

> I tried the demo. The default player is too weak. It makes too many silly mistakes. The harder players is hard. I'll try again tomorrow.

Thank you for playing it. And that's great, that's more or less how I intended. I want players to start with a bit that isn't too intimidating, so that you can select a stronger one after if needed. And I'm glad that the stronger one gave you some challenge.

> The bishops that bounce against the walls when there is a corner with 3 squares in the border are weird

Currently, I define a diagonal as 2 tiles sharing a point and no edge. So by that definition, you will indeed see tiles on the edge which make up a diagonal. Definitely the type you can't see on a regular board. There could be an alternative definition where you need to have 2 other tiles that share edges with those first 2 tiles (as is the case almost everywhere inside the board), but I like to embrace the weirdness that this brings, so I keep the first one.

And yes, knights here are much harder to predict!