| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 Are concepts of warfare useful metaphors for the way we actually play chess? “. . . security forces appeared to redeploy from other towns to join the latest crackdown on a popular rising. . .” And I find myself asking: When we play chess, is it a game on a chessboard or a warfight on a chess battlefield? In your chess, do you find you are fighting your opponent along a “front”? Do you find yourself “re-deploying” a piece to re-engage in a struggle? Do you find your forces bunched up in different zones (like the “other towns” in the story), from which, if mobile, your pieces can rush to the current combat zone? Speculation is, that if we venture back over a millenium in time, we find chess as a game arising as an abstraction of war: with different pieces representing different warfighting entities. Now, when you look at your bishop, or you look at your knight, or you look at your rook for the purposes of building and then launching an attack – do you see your pieces in military terms? Do you find it useful, when attacking, to think of your different pieces, with their different abilities at targeting and striking, even at occupying "conquered" territory -- do you think of your chesspieces as different kinds of weapons with their different firepower? If cognition really depends on words, if we really think in words: Then when you think about chess, when you think about that next move, do you find yourself thinking in military terms? |
||
|
Are concepts of warfare useful metaphors for the way we actually play … |
||
|
grege79 07-Jun-11, 03:29 |
|
||
|
sacul219 07-Jun-11, 03:55 |
|
||
|
sand table exercise. Now i take it sometimes to a new level and set up 'sand table exercise' with Troops,Tanks, landscapes, trenches, fortifications, kill zones and the like. Or i put a huge blue cloth down on the table with 'grids' and my Navies(battleships,Cruisers,Destroyers etc) engage on the high seas. But i do this only if the game is of great importance. And thats getting rarer and rarer now. Make no- mistake;Chess is a military game. And every game can be a synthesis of particular a battlefield. |
||
|
brigade commander's war games as the creation of a chess cosmos "landscapes" !! "grids" !!! "fortifications" !!!! "Killzones" !!!!! Now That is the way to conceptualize, construct, create, strategize, cosmogenize, foresee, reason with, engage with, experiment with, and prevail with a model! That is the way to think, and that is surely the way to win. . |
||
|
hmm ( but i also find it a reverse engineered aspect, and so not very accurate to use as metaphor) For me it is just visualized vectoring and mathematics, a bit like snooker but then whiteout balls. - Logic - --------------------------------------------- The best military strategy is making a chaos and then find the order of things in the chaos. there are no rules to be able to apply rules. (in-logic) The best chess strategy is using rules to find order and then find chaos in the order there are rules to be able to disband the rules. (logic) |
||
|
To compare it to actual war, the game would need to develop with modern warfare. We should have a little mushroom cloud piece that represents the nukes. Maybe the rook could become this piece, with the ability to "kill" everything in an 8 square vicinity... LOL! Then the bishops could become UN nuke inspectors and if you don't use the nukes before "discovered" you'd lose them for the rest of the game. The world would be a better place if we were having the reverse of this discussion. If our nations settled their disputes on chess boards and other games and tests of intellect, rather than decimating each other's populations. But the world is ruled by idiots. |
||
|
Bishops and Knights= mechanized Divisions Pawns=infantry Divisions for example here is a game(on-going) where white in the opening is attacking with three infantry divisions(pawns) on a broad central 'front' supported my Tank divisions (R's AND Q). Flanking maneuvers are used also. The Geography of the chess board is the same as it would be on a real battlefield,both sides are constrained or helped by roads. rivers,heavy forests,man-made obstacles and the like.You even have a third dimension (air-power) seen in the movements of the Knights.(hellicopter assault) gameknot.com now perhaps i'm a nut!! but all chess players are a bit strange yes? easy19 is talking about a different way of playing.Shamus plays that way too.I don't pretend to really understand that way yet as i am still learning.But i think it involves 'psychological methods' and the ability to know in advance what the board will look like far far down the road.In other words its on a different level of play then i am..... YET!!!....BC |
||
|
pennsylvaniadan 08-Jun-11, 05:04 |
|
Log in 
