Poker or Chess???

[hmkpoker]

I think RTS is a little different. A lot of skill in RTS comes from conditioned stimulus-response. Good micro, once you get fast enough at it, is pretty straightforward strategy (I played undead on Battle.net back in college [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) RTS is also a bit more psychological, because you're working with imperfect information, unlike chess. I think RTS is closer to poker than chess personally.

Fun as hell though [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ubtleonflagrant]

I think imperfect information adds a lot of depth and increases thinking. You are always thinking what the other person is doing, what is the best thing to do against that. It requires a lot more thinking than already knowing, and more of a variety of thinking.

[atrifix]

[ QUOTE ]
The best player in the world, Kasparov, has basically memorized every possible move one can make in a game and plays accordingly, which is the same thing a computer does when it plays chess. When he rarely makes a wrong move he often realizes it right after and gets angry.

[/ QUOTE ]Kasparov is no longer playing chess, so he can't really be considered the best player in the world anymore. And about everything else in these two sentences is also incorrect.

Comparing RTSs and Chess isn't like comparing apples and oranges, it's like comparing apples and quarks. In RTSs, you're constantly moving and multitasking, and games rarely last more than a half hour. In chess, you may have to sit still for 12 hours a day. And to those who think that sounds easy: try it. It's grueling.

[kurto]

Chess players do not just memorize moves. I think this shows a fundamental flaw in your understanding of chess.

Chess players use strategy and must adjust their strategy to their opponents.

I have no problem saying that Chess is a more sophisticated strategy game. Also worthy of note; there is no luck in chess. One is completely accountable for their actions.

Poker has a lot of strategies and develops a lot of skills. Though I think this has to be measured against the quality of your opponents. Discussing how 2 poker pros who know each other well has many layers of strategy and analysis.

Playing at your average full ring table against a bunch of strangers with mixed traits... it becomes 'play by rote.'

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Comparing RTSs and Chess isn't like comparing apples and oranges, it's like comparing apples and quarks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
The best player in the world, Kasparov, has basically memorized every possible move one can make in a game and plays accordingly, which is the same thing a computer does when it plays chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement alone takes away any credibility you might have when discussing chess.

[TorpedoBreath]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a friend who struggles at poker and yet he is a chess master. I pride myself at being pretty good at chess. When I play my friend, he turns his back at me and calls out his moves. I then make my move and call to him in code what I've done (he plays me the equivalent of blindfolded). When I make my moves, he is always helpful to me, and explains to me the problems with my moves and where I could better move my pieces ( at all times, he has his back turned). Half way through games, he'll tell me a move to make for him and I'll explain that that move is impossible. We will review the moves, and to my chagrin, it will always turn out that I will have made a mistake in the chess code that he calls to me and will have moved his piece inadvertantly to the wrong position sometime in the play. MY mistake. My friend never becomes angry. He just asks me what the current board looks like. After I explain to him, he readjusts the picture in his mind to the current picture and then proceeds to beat me anyway. I have never beaten him, even though I can beat the vast majority of chess enthusiasts. This type of intellect astounds me. I will never be able to comprehend it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most casual chess players are impressed by blindfold displays. But I would think anyone with a rating above 1800 should be able to beat a non-tournament playing casual player blindfolded most of the time. Any 1800+ players care to disagree? I'm just taking a stab here.

Maybe you'll be impressed if I told you I can beat any poker player in the world you pick at least 39% of the time at NL holdem heads up and blindfolded!

[ubtleonflagrant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The best player in the world, Kasparov, has basically memorized every possible move one can make in a game and plays accordingly, which is the same thing a computer does when it plays chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement alone takes away any credibility you might have when discussing chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it works about the same as memorizing because if he does not recognize the situation from previous experience he thinks it through again and plays the best possible move.

My point was there are only a limited number of moves and there is always one move that is better than the rest and therefore it only has so much potential.

There aren't many people who have reached this level though, so for the vast majority of chess players the finite number of moves does not matter.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't say every RTS video game has as much potential as Chess but well balanced games such as StarCraft are much deeper and require much more strategic thinking than chess.

[/ QUOTE ]

W
O
W

(and Ive played a lot of starcraft)

[hmkpoker]

WOW isn't RTS [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]