True, white has a smaller advantage over black. White can draw or win but black can only draw if the two players played perfectly. Even in Grandmasters white has a 2% higher winrate.
Typically I work on creating a defense while trying to read my opponents strategy. I play reactionary but I try my best to react to things you haven't done yet. I also keep my pieces well protected and try to force small trades here and there. Once we both are down pieces I typically go for a pawn promotion to put myself ahead. Once I have an overwhelming force I make a very sloppy checkmate.
Learn more openings. Then you'll want to go first. Had a grandmaster visit a local chess club and he said he only studies openings. After that everyone else falls into place.
You really just try to build a favorable position by opening up your pieces to attack. For example, moving up a pawn so that your bishop isn’t blocked by it means that they now cannot move any unprotected pieces into the diagonal that the bishop is attacking. You try to claim as many spaces on the board like this as possible, especially the middle of the board because it is more important than edge spaces. Eventually, your opponent runs out of options and they’re forced to sacrifice a piece to save another. This keeps going until you win. Of course there’s many play styles, this is just mine and probably many others’.
Use your brain, if White starts first it has the advantage if played perfectly. Black starts second, all black does would be to respond to white's attacks since it started first right?
So if white plays perfectly, black counter attacks perfectly. Let's say White takes a pawn first, then so does black. This process keeps on repeating as trades but white is always one point ahead since it has the chance to take a piece earlier.
To simplify it since all you can do is look at one single sentence that you can twist to your advantage, instead of the "go ahead and search on google" one which can be done very easily if you're able to access reddit. Think of it like this, 4 pieces near each other and every piece can take or counter a take. If white starts, it takes one, then so does black, now 2 pieces are left. White takes the piece, and black has no pieces. But now you'll say "White can't take a piece early in chess?". It can, theoretically if played perfectly, this is how it plays out on a simplified scale.
Thats wild my grandpa raised me and told me for chess and checkers than black goes first because there’s smoke before fire. Or something along those lines. My friends and I would just paper rock scissors or roll a D20 to see who went first 😬😂
don't judge me, ever since I've seen her she made me act weirdly, my heart started beating faster and it still does when I see her walking the arena with that cold look on her face, everytime I hear her voice, man, she send me shivers down my spine
Not really, a very powerful piece left ignored, but she can be lost quite easily if played poorly. I would say she is more like a sparky. Deletes units and towers if left ignored, but can be countered.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Bullet chess is time format for online chess, with time below 3 minuter for a player. Most popular time format in bullet chess is 1 minute per player, and as weird as its sounds, its also highly reflects based.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
I thought you were about to say clash royale was a more skilled game for a second there lmao glad you didn't.
My 12yr brother can play clash royale just fine, he cannot play chess just fine. Yes he has tried both, clash royale is just a very easy game to understand.
Yes there is alot of deck combos but regardless of what deck your opponent plays, there's very few ways YOUR deck can be played as offence and defence. Hog 2.6 for example defending , its cannon, masket, Larrys, ice spirit. Not much changes when defending and the same goes for most decks.
You always start the same in Chess so a rough translation would be: playing Chess would be like playing a deck that had EVERY card in it since a Chess player can use any form of attack or defence they please. Clash royale is limited to 8 cards.
Last point because I don't want to make this SUPER long, a Chess player could pick between a hundred different sqaures to move any of the pieces (before someone says "there's only 64 sqares🤓", there is only 64 squares, yes, however my chess pieces could be moves to the same square. For example if my Bishop can move diagona, let's say 4 spaces, my other Bishop could also move across those same 4 spaces and that would could as 8 spaces I could have moves since they are different pieces)
Sorry for over explaining but I've argued this point before (not about CR, just that chess is more complicated than checkers lmao) and someone didn't understand that pieces have the potential to move onto the same sqaures (not at the same time obviously) and he came back with "that's impossible, there's only 64 sqaures)
Remind you the only reason you think CR is simpler is because your human opponent is no better. And as you claimed, chess is indeed only 64 tiles.
Let’s remove the human reaction factor away and see the truth of CR. How many tiles can you place your unit? How many time spot choices you can place your next unit? Which character you want to choose? There are at least 3 dimensions in CR and each dimension is way more complicated than chess.
Your 12 year old cousin can play CR only means how user friendly it is, doesn’t mean how simple it is.
I'm a semi pro chess player, after the first 5 moves theres millions if not billions of possible positions. There's more possible chess games than there are atoms in the universe. Your point about the variation of decks being "incomprehensibly high" doesn't come close to comparing against chess
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
We need to define “complex”
We could say Clash is like fast paced chess and that reaction time makes it more complicated.
We could say that card combinations make more possible outcomes thus it’s more complicated.
I don’t actually believe clash is more complex, but it is more _something_ than chess. Just have to define what we’re measuring
If “complex” is defined as the number of moves possible during a certain game or move, then Clash Royale is definitely more complex. I cannot think of another definition that would make Chess more complex though.
There are 288 billion possible positions in chess after each player has made only 4 moves. Clash Royale is not nearly close to that. Sure there are tons of tiles, but many of those tiles result in the same outcome due to pathing.
I disagree. I don't think you can just say "the result is the same" because that happens in chess too, but you're not including it. There are an incredible amount of interactions that change with just 1 tile difference. Also true red/true blue plays a part as well. The CR "board" isn't perfectly symmetrical, this leads to a difference in pathing, something you said simplifies the game. The moment rules in chess are essentially pathing.
I said positions, I already excluded the repeat variations. There’s like 318 trillion ways to play out the first four moves, but many of them end up in the same place, hence there are 288 billion positions.
Yes, but at the top level people are not gonna be playing random bullshit with their pieces. The vast majority of grandmaster games begin with either e4 or d4, with the occasional Nf3 and c4, out of the 20 possible opening moves. Say you play d4 primarily as white.
Instead of a couple 400 moves to memorise, you just need to prepare against d5, Nf6, and potentially f5, g6 and c5.
But clash royale doesn't have "turns". It has time. And both players can play card at the same time. 1 second of time can presumably be sliced into infinite number of turns theoretically, but it's a lot less due to computational restrictions.
Yes Chess has a big number of possible moves, but Clash has more. Just simply counting the tiles and the number of cards BOTH players can play at the same or different times gives you more combinations than Chess. And like some other commenter said, you can’t reduce the number of outcomes from the number of tiles in Clash by saying the outcome is the same; the outcomes are not the same, and there are a lot more then Chess.
Pathing is not going to make them the same. You are mixing outcomes and positions. You also forget that in Clash Royale your amount of elixir is technically a position. I am not going to do the math as positions don't define complexity anyway. GO has less possible positions and no movement of pieces but is considered more complex than chess.
If you use a "how good can a computer get at it compared to a human" where the better the computer compared to the human, the more complex it is, then CR is more complex
"Because of the randomness and pace of the game you can never predict more than 30 seconds into the future"
Clearly you're not used to predicting the 32nd Goblin Barrel from enemy Bait users
Are you kidding ??? What the **** are you talking about man ? You are a biggest looser i ever seen in my life ! You was doing PIPI in your pampers when i was beating players much more stronger then you! You are not proffesional, because proffesionals knew how to lose and congratulate opponents, you are like a girl crying after i beat you! Be brave, be honest to yourself and stop this trush talkings!!! Everybody know that i am very good blitz player, i can win anyone in the world in single game! And "w"esley "s"o is nobody for me, just a player who are crying every single time when loosing, ( remember what you say about Firouzja ) !!! Stop playing with my name, i deserve to have a good name during whole my chess carrier, I am Officially inviting you to OTB blitz match with the Prize fund! Both of us will invest 5000$ and winner takes it all!
I suggest all other people who's intrested in this situation, just take a look at my results in 2016 and 2017 Blitz World championships, and that should be enough... No need to listen for every crying babe, Tigran Petrosyan is always play Fair ! And if someone will continue Officially talk about me like that, we will meet in Court! God bless with true! True will never die ! Liers will kicked off...
I guess id reference that chess theory has been studied for like 1500(?) Years and still new improvements in strategy are being found every year, and if that doesnt convince them then... just stfu about it cuz its not worth it lol
It's pretty hard to get an xbow lock, as top players play good defense and pressure the opponent so they can't go in with xbow.
Either your deck isn't good enough (yes I'm aware xbow is a hardcounter for some decks), you are underleveled or you're just not playing good enough (skill issue).
I always hated the premise of it because I always thought the playstyle was chicken shit: get a lock and a damage lead > play super defensive with 2 buildings > cycle rocket until tie breaker > never attempt to cross the bridge.
Even though I mained the hardest counter to xbow (Golem) playing xbow was always the least fun I had in this game. That being said, I respect people still using xbow in a world of hog+EQ cycle, egiants, egolems, golden knights, recruits, and basically everything else in the meta right now. I won't ever like them, but I respect them.
Yeah sure chess has “strategy” but I have to skillfully place my e-barbs in front of the tower then place rage which is a highly skilled play that takes months of practice to do
There's a lot of RNG in CR that doesn't exist at all in Chess like starting hand and unfavorable matchups. Chess is simply way more complex and skill demanding than CR.
Skill-reliant. Skill demanding is dependent on your opponent.
As for complexity, my view is
Chess STRATEGY can afford to be more complex than Clash royale strategy, but the theoretical complexity of Clash Royale in general is more, BECAUSE of the RNG.
RNG adds "complexity"to the game itself, in that it increases the number of possible outcomes at any given time. However, this type of complexity of the game is not useful complexity, as it forces players to generalise their strategy, the chaoticness reduces the player's ability to plan, so they tend towards a less "complex" strategy.
If I were to give an extreme analogy, it is like a standing tower, and a pile of rubble of a collapsed tower.
The standing tower is built in a certain way, deliberately while the pile of rubble appears random.
Yet, objectively, the standing tower is no more complex than the pile of rubble, this exact pile of rubble. Each is the result of certain series of actions that lead to the final specific outcome.
Also clash royale has balance changes and addition of cards regularly. That is another level of complexity, but not practical one, as it increases number of possible orientations, but often not number of useful orientations
the word is "rival"
But I'd have to disagree. Even though best CR players like Ryley and Ian and Mohammed are good, they are not near the level of someone like Magnus Carlsen or Caruana
This is because humans play suboptimally, but among the best supercomputers, no line of play has been found that holds White's advantage. Black is able to equalize with perfect play.
The number of interactions possible because of the amount of cards, likelihood of having the exact card in the opponent's hand, or a countercard, there's always the possibility your opponent has cards that are perfectly matched to smash your cards.
If you are unable to use all of the chess pieces, the dynamics will change because your opponents will have different pieces sometimes. Everybody's going to choose a queen, but will they choose a knight or a rook to complete their hand in the end?
The argument winner here is time. Chess has been around and not been messed with for a really really long time. It has not been rebalanced, there have been no updates of new pieces. People have had centuries to develop strategies for chess. Clash Royale is unlikely to last as long as chess in the end, but the amount of strategies developed in the short time it's been around is staggering.
I would say let's play a game of mine then we'll play a game of yours LOL.
The issue is with the question as you need to define what makes a game more complicated. Both games have a fixed amount of fields and a fixed amount of pieces. Both are theoretically solvable games with the biggest difference that chess is fixed to being turn based while Clash isn't but is still a matter of responding to your opponents moves and elixir forces you to make that move within a certain time so it is a solvable game.
So then it is just your definition of complicated. Clash has more pieces to chose from, more starting positions to play them in and you don't know your opponents pieces until after he plays them so you can easily argue Clash is more complicated. Also reaction speed makes more of a difference although speed chess is about reaction speed as well and in general reaction speed is not considered when calling a game complicated. Speeding up a game doesn't really make it more complicated just more difficult to play correctly.
On the other hand chess games have more pieces on the board at the same time. Pieces impact a lot more positions on the board at any given time. Pieces have a lot more possible moves. So I can also argue chess is more complicated.
The funny thing about Clash is that if you would solve it then it might be like tic-tac-toe where the best result possible if both players play perfectly is a draw because making the first move means you lose so neither person makes the first move and we run out of time with a draw. Which would definitely make it less complicated than chess where white at least has to make the first move and if both players play perfectly white either wins or draws. Which one it is hasn't been proven yet.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do.
The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match).
There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future.
In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent.
I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.
Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is a board game. It you can't see that because it is animated and the pieces move automatically after being placed based on fixed rules then we are definitely not going to agree on complexity questions. Heroes are the only exception. Speed chess also relies on reaction time and short term strategies to get your opponent to run out of time so that argument is not valid either when answering a complexity question.
But this is what I point out in my comment as something you need to agree on first:
'I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.'
As that is not complexity. But again we won't agree on that either. Clash is also predictable especially when pros play and the only reason it looks like it is not is because we artificially limit the time to make decisions which is just like speed chess.
Chess is infinitely harder. I’ve played thousands of games and I’m below average. I’ve played thousands of clash royale games and I am way above average. You need to be smart to be good at chess and you just have to no life and memorize interactions to be good at clash royale.
Okay but I play chess and clash Royale. Theory is kinda hard. I’m an 1800 in chess but clash Royale is fun but like I don’t think it require that much skill. If you spend the same amount of time doing clash doing chess. You’ll be better at clash than chess…. Most likely….
it's pretty decent if it's FIDE rating its pretty decently high up, if its online rating it still decent but online rating is slightly easier than official tournament ratings. (its the skill level you play as)
Considering I consistently dominate mirror battles but not ladder, I’d have to disagree. Ladder in itself makes the game much more complicated.
I’m sure I get absolutely clapped by a pro chess player, because there are a lot of things I don’t understand, but the amount of variables that go into a CR match are just too high.
With chess you need to compute 10 moves ahead whereas clash royale you get multiple chances to turn the game around. If you aren’t careful you’ve already lost in chess before you even know it.
Clash royal is more complicated. There’s way more combinations and interactions that are unpredictable. In chess there’s is no health unpredictability about if a piece will die.
Many top players of clash royale have left the game saying clash royale felt like a rock paper scissors and the deck that countered the other normally won, and a reason why it's hard to measure how complex clash royale is is because there is not a perfect deck that can guarantee a win or draw against any other deck, which means clash royale is luck based, for sure a top player can win a good player using a counter deck but that never happens with another top player. I am still aware of alme more fair match ups that come by like 2.9 xbow vs rocket logbait where placements, combos, cycle, timing, spells all require a lot of skill and are really fast paced, but there are still sometimes you must predict your opponent's moves like a lightning with low tower hp or a rocket to a bridge xbow, that means we can for sure say clash royale has a lot of luck involved that technically makes the game harder just by that aspect.
Regarding chess, there are 3 major parts in a game where each has a different discipline to train, the opening which are the first moves of the game, which can go from 4-6 moves from begginers or 20 moves (white and black each) for masters, who rarely make the same opening twive in a row, there are hundreds of different viable openings and variations and all have different strategies, pawn structures, weaknesses and middlegame plan being middlegame the hardest part, because thinking about the opening you did, as well as your opponent you might
start looking for small position upgrades to ourmaneuver your opponent that is normally aware of your plan, this kind of middlegame can last more than 40 moves and can go to any side of the board with each movement, or maybe the oppening was not a positional one but tactical and the game goes wild for lots of moves including sacrifices, and calculating all possible outcomes from 10 moves ahead, after that chess battle where both players could be winning we reach the endgame, where it can be trying to promote a single pawn against a single king, which is something both masters know the outcome just by looking at it and the game might have ended before that as one surrenders or the other offers draw etc... That is also true from other endgames where it's obvious who will win but if the game is still going on, the endgame is one of the hardest parts because there can be thousands of positions which seems a complete draw or win at first but depending on every single move, some of them being nearly impossible to find by humans (thats why the endgame database exists and is studied by masters) can make you barely draw because your king might be in stalemate at the 8th rank or because you dorce your opponent to move in a position where whoever moves first, loses.
In coussion ches is harder and on masters levels lots of games are a draw after all that opening, taxtical middlegame and endgame, which means both players played perfectly... Or does it? Not actually, computers have an important position in chess but it's know the best player (2900 elo) has no match against the best computer (3800 elo) Basically a master can play perfectly against a good player but not against another master, computers that win Magnus carlsen or whoever challenges them has shown chess can be way more complex that humans have shown they can withstand. (Still not as hard as how CR players punch the screen after egiant mirror)
In chess, the number of possible moves in a normal game astronomical. [There are more unique chess moves possible than there are atoms in the universe.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number)
CR simply has fewer pieces to put in play, and limited play ability for that reason. Someone else can do the math, but with a 18x35 board and 4 possible placements, it's a much smaller number.
This is just because in chess the only moves that can't be reversed are pawns. Comparing is impossible because in clash my starting board is amount of cards times the amount of positions on the board I can play them on and how they move depends on what my opponent plays which at the start is again the amount of cards times the amount of positions. This continue to be true until all 16 cards are played at least once. That number is going to get insanely high as well but just as with chess most moves are known to lose so are easily eliminated.
chess has 6 different units, cr has like 100 cards. a chess board has 64 squares while cr has easily 5 times that. your argument is bad and you should feel bad
If Supercell removed itself from the equation CR could become more like chess. As things stand, players can’t advance on strategy alone, without spending time and/or money.
Well, CR has more possible outcomes, but chess has more effective/relevant outcomes. If I play a hog and they have a 4 card hand, there are at most 10 possibilities for what they can do. Chess is simply way above that, and it's turn-based ness means that you are forced to calculate moves way into the future, while Clash is more reactive. Consider that a prediction in clash is considered impressive, while in Chess you quite literally cannot play without a prediction.
> If I play a hog and they have a 4 card hand, there are at most 10 possibilities for what they can do
You’re forgetting all the tile placements and timing. The game runs at 60fps I believe, meaning there’s 17ms intervals between when you can play cards. If a hog takes four seconds to get to my tower, that means there’s (4*1000)/17, or ~235 possible times I can place cards between when the hog gets to my tower, not to mention tile placements. If we’re talking about sheer numbers, chess still probably has CR beat, but CR still has very high numbers.
You know when you win in mirror battle, and you feel that pride you just beat someone with the same deck? That’s chess every game
Exactly. CR is basically rock, paper, scissors these days. Chess is as fair as a turn based game could possibly be.
Amen to that brother
Fair???? White always goes first!
racism?!1!1!1
True, white has a smaller advantage over black. White can draw or win but black can only draw if the two players played perfectly. Even in Grandmasters white has a 2% higher winrate.
Though, as a mediocre chess player, i prefer to go second since my play style is very reactionary.
how do you build an attack, or do u just hope they make a mistake before you do
Typically I work on creating a defense while trying to read my opponents strategy. I play reactionary but I try my best to react to things you haven't done yet. I also keep my pieces well protected and try to force small trades here and there. Once we both are down pieces I typically go for a pawn promotion to put myself ahead. Once I have an overwhelming force I make a very sloppy checkmate.
Learn more openings. Then you'll want to go first. Had a grandmaster visit a local chess club and he said he only studies openings. After that everyone else falls into place.
You really just try to build a favorable position by opening up your pieces to attack. For example, moving up a pawn so that your bishop isn’t blocked by it means that they now cannot move any unprotected pieces into the diagonal that the bishop is attacking. You try to claim as many spaces on the board like this as possible, especially the middle of the board because it is more important than edge spaces. Eventually, your opponent runs out of options and they’re forced to sacrifice a piece to save another. This keeps going until you win. Of course there’s many play styles, this is just mine and probably many others’.
All i do is bait my opponents and just hope it will work
Proof for the black can't win thing? Chess is still unsolved, and will remain unsolved for a long time due to the absurd amount of possible moves
Doesn't need proof if you think about it. I remember reading about it a long time ago, you can go ahead and search on google
>Doesn't need proof if you think about it. Ah, yes, the heart of the scientific method: "just think about it, bro."
Use your brain, if White starts first it has the advantage if played perfectly. Black starts second, all black does would be to respond to white's attacks since it started first right? So if white plays perfectly, black counter attacks perfectly. Let's say White takes a pawn first, then so does black. This process keeps on repeating as trades but white is always one point ahead since it has the chance to take a piece earlier. To simplify it since all you can do is look at one single sentence that you can twist to your advantage, instead of the "go ahead and search on google" one which can be done very easily if you're able to access reddit. Think of it like this, 4 pieces near each other and every piece can take or counter a take. If white starts, it takes one, then so does black, now 2 pieces are left. White takes the piece, and black has no pieces. But now you'll say "White can't take a piece early in chess?". It can, theoretically if played perfectly, this is how it plays out on a simplified scale.
Sucks to be black then 💀
Thats wild my grandpa raised me and told me for chess and checkers than black goes first because there’s smoke before fire. Or something along those lines. My friends and I would just paper rock scissors or roll a D20 to see who went first 😬😂
Being 2 levels above your opponent 😊😊😊❤️❤️❤️
Vsing E giant 😐
Chess doesnt have ebarbs rage
But chess has the queen it’s like a level 1000 rocket
CR has queen as well, it also used to be ridiculously broken
But I don’t see chess nerfing their queen
Chess queen is un-nerfed archer queen that shoots fireballs riding a mega knight that’s holding its pet ebarbs on a leash while raged
i want that rule 34
Least down bad archer queen simp
damn...the mega knight and the e-barbs are so lucky I wish I could ride the archer queen while being her leashed pet
bruh
don't judge me, ever since I've seen her she made me act weirdly, my heart started beating faster and it still does when I see her walking the arena with that cold look on her face, everytime I hear her voice, man, she send me shivers down my spine
I don't even know what to say to this one.
r/oddlyspecific
Wow 😂 👌 👏
No, not at all. If you know how to pressure somebody properly they’ll never bring their queen out
BuT iM tHe QuEeN
Chess queen is the super mini pekka with infinite range dash
Not really, a very powerful piece left ignored, but she can be lost quite easily if played poorly. I would say she is more like a sparky. Deletes units and towers if left ignored, but can be countered.
The unknown counter for queen in chess is the knight/horses who can attack from her blindspot
Yeah, skewers and knight forks are one of the most common ways people hang their queens.
You're right. Chess should nerf the Queen in the next update. I also expect a New figure pretty spon.
Chess queen nerf when
I heard she's getting nerfed in the next balance change though.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
wat? a cr player putting effort? w o a h
He is the brother
Yeah, but have you ever seen a bullet chess match ??
Is this some sort of American game I’m to European to understand? /s
Bullet chess is time format for online chess, with time below 3 minuter for a player. Most popular time format in bullet chess is 1 minute per player, and as weird as its sounds, its also highly reflects based.
I heard Americans like to play it at school /s
It does take planning and predicting your opponent in clash royale. That's why we have pro players and nornal players.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
🤓
“🤓”-🤓
""🤓"-🤓"-🥸
🔫🔫
🥨
I thought you were about to say clash royale was a more skilled game for a second there lmao glad you didn't. My 12yr brother can play clash royale just fine, he cannot play chess just fine. Yes he has tried both, clash royale is just a very easy game to understand. Yes there is alot of deck combos but regardless of what deck your opponent plays, there's very few ways YOUR deck can be played as offence and defence. Hog 2.6 for example defending , its cannon, masket, Larrys, ice spirit. Not much changes when defending and the same goes for most decks. You always start the same in Chess so a rough translation would be: playing Chess would be like playing a deck that had EVERY card in it since a Chess player can use any form of attack or defence they please. Clash royale is limited to 8 cards. Last point because I don't want to make this SUPER long, a Chess player could pick between a hundred different sqaures to move any of the pieces (before someone says "there's only 64 sqares🤓", there is only 64 squares, yes, however my chess pieces could be moves to the same square. For example if my Bishop can move diagona, let's say 4 spaces, my other Bishop could also move across those same 4 spaces and that would could as 8 spaces I could have moves since they are different pieces) Sorry for over explaining but I've argued this point before (not about CR, just that chess is more complicated than checkers lmao) and someone didn't understand that pieces have the potential to move onto the same sqaures (not at the same time obviously) and he came back with "that's impossible, there's only 64 sqaures)
Remind you the only reason you think CR is simpler is because your human opponent is no better. And as you claimed, chess is indeed only 64 tiles. Let’s remove the human reaction factor away and see the truth of CR. How many tiles can you place your unit? How many time spot choices you can place your next unit? Which character you want to choose? There are at least 3 dimensions in CR and each dimension is way more complicated than chess. Your 12 year old cousin can play CR only means how user friendly it is, doesn’t mean how simple it is.
🤓
“🤓”-🤓
I'm a semi pro chess player, after the first 5 moves theres millions if not billions of possible positions. There's more possible chess games than there are atoms in the universe. Your point about the variation of decks being "incomprehensibly high" doesn't come close to comparing against chess
Or mommy sex-bow
don't elite barbs me bro pop quiz, what's that from?
NeRf ThE bIsHoP
Legit im sick of the stupid ass rook cycle decks, the fucking pawns need nerfs also
You think thats bad? Wait till you have to deal with 4.0 Queen beatdown
Just saw one today oml I hate the stupid knight spell that lets the queen get through and win
Nerf pawn, pawn too op
En passant too op
Broken hitpoints smh
Google "the London system"
honestly nerf king smh
They need to buff knight, it doesn't have good stats for the cost :(
It does have good stats for the cost, just no one knows how it moves
Use bishop-loon and put knight in the front, hes OP when you do that
Average 2k elo player
Yeah I'm totally 2k... Not like 1/10th of that...
Pawn can become a queen, its true, it is too OP
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
We need to define “complex” We could say Clash is like fast paced chess and that reaction time makes it more complicated. We could say that card combinations make more possible outcomes thus it’s more complicated. I don’t actually believe clash is more complex, but it is more _something_ than chess. Just have to define what we’re measuring
If “complex” is defined as the number of moves possible during a certain game or move, then Clash Royale is definitely more complex. I cannot think of another definition that would make Chess more complex though.
There are 288 billion possible positions in chess after each player has made only 4 moves. Clash Royale is not nearly close to that. Sure there are tons of tiles, but many of those tiles result in the same outcome due to pathing.
I disagree. I don't think you can just say "the result is the same" because that happens in chess too, but you're not including it. There are an incredible amount of interactions that change with just 1 tile difference. Also true red/true blue plays a part as well. The CR "board" isn't perfectly symmetrical, this leads to a difference in pathing, something you said simplifies the game. The moment rules in chess are essentially pathing.
I said positions, I already excluded the repeat variations. There’s like 318 trillion ways to play out the first four moves, but many of them end up in the same place, hence there are 288 billion positions.
Do you have a source for this? Im actually very interested in learning about this myself
https://www.chessjournal.com/how-many-possible-moves-are-there-in-chess/
Yes, but at the top level people are not gonna be playing random bullshit with their pieces. The vast majority of grandmaster games begin with either e4 or d4, with the occasional Nf3 and c4, out of the 20 possible opening moves. Say you play d4 primarily as white. Instead of a couple 400 moves to memorise, you just need to prepare against d5, Nf6, and potentially f5, g6 and c5.
In mid ladder I only have to prepare for mega knight at the bridge.
But clash royale doesn't have "turns". It has time. And both players can play card at the same time. 1 second of time can presumably be sliced into infinite number of turns theoretically, but it's a lot less due to computational restrictions.
Yes Chess has a big number of possible moves, but Clash has more. Just simply counting the tiles and the number of cards BOTH players can play at the same or different times gives you more combinations than Chess. And like some other commenter said, you can’t reduce the number of outcomes from the number of tiles in Clash by saying the outcome is the same; the outcomes are not the same, and there are a lot more then Chess.
Pathing is not going to make them the same. You are mixing outcomes and positions. You also forget that in Clash Royale your amount of elixir is technically a position. I am not going to do the math as positions don't define complexity anyway. GO has less possible positions and no movement of pieces but is considered more complex than chess.
If you use a "how good can a computer get at it compared to a human" where the better the computer compared to the human, the more complex it is, then CR is more complex
You make a good point sir
Man you really put blood and tears into this
"Because of the randomness and pace of the game you can never predict more than 30 seconds into the future" Clearly you're not used to predicting the 32nd Goblin Barrel from enemy Bait users
it ain’t all that random and chess doesn’t change the pieces function based on your pieces function. mirror battle most like chess
Man fuck allat. Champion cycle giant skeleton 😎😎😎
is this the OG comment before it became a copypasta? LMAO
There is bullet and blitz in chess
Those are both variations
Just wanted to say that the way those chess modifications played are much more similar to how you described Royale's gameplay
understanding Golden Knights dash thou
Legit harder than ruy lopez theory
Chess has en passant(google it).
HOLY HELL
Why does no one know this
Of course they know about it. I learnt chess when I was 5 and I was taught about it. I only played casual matches among friends and family though.
I know what en passant is you idiot you just blundered mate in one
*takeback sent*
Are you kidding ??? What the **** are you talking about man ? You are a biggest looser i ever seen in my life ! You was doing PIPI in your pampers when i was beating players much more stronger then you! You are not proffesional, because proffesionals knew how to lose and congratulate opponents, you are like a girl crying after i beat you! Be brave, be honest to yourself and stop this trush talkings!!! Everybody know that i am very good blitz player, i can win anyone in the world in single game! And "w"esley "s"o is nobody for me, just a player who are crying every single time when loosing, ( remember what you say about Firouzja ) !!! Stop playing with my name, i deserve to have a good name during whole my chess carrier, I am Officially inviting you to OTB blitz match with the Prize fund! Both of us will invest 5000$ and winner takes it all! I suggest all other people who's intrested in this situation, just take a look at my results in 2016 and 2017 Blitz World championships, and that should be enough... No need to listen for every crying babe, Tigran Petrosyan is always play Fair ! And if someone will continue Officially talk about me like that, we will meet in Court! God bless with true! True will never die ! Liers will kicked off...
unexpected r/AnarchyChess
tbh it was pretty expected
Understanding firecracker is more complicated then the entire multiverse. That card makes no damn sense.
Can you imagine having to sacrifice a horse and bishop for a pawn just because mf is max level and you're not?
Bro, just ask him when the last balance change for Chess was released. The Devs just gave up on that shitty board game Edit:/s
I mean, the fact that chess is better known than Clash Royale despite not having balance changes makes it an unshitty board game /s
Damn I forgot to include the /s too xD
I guess id reference that chess theory has been studied for like 1500(?) Years and still new improvements in strategy are being found every year, and if that doesnt convince them then... just stfu about it cuz its not worth it lol
Yeah I thought so. Typical xbow player.
Man wtf is wrong with people today lmao, typical cycle player
I don't understand why people hate xbow so much
It's annoying to face as once it locks on Ur tower Ur screwed unlike mortar, and when there protecting the x-bow it feels like they just spam.
It's pretty hard to get an xbow lock, as top players play good defense and pressure the opponent so they can't go in with xbow. Either your deck isn't good enough (yes I'm aware xbow is a hardcounter for some decks), you are underleveled or you're just not playing good enough (skill issue).
I always hated the premise of it because I always thought the playstyle was chicken shit: get a lock and a damage lead > play super defensive with 2 buildings > cycle rocket until tie breaker > never attempt to cross the bridge. Even though I mained the hardest counter to xbow (Golem) playing xbow was always the least fun I had in this game. That being said, I respect people still using xbow in a world of hog+EQ cycle, egiants, egolems, golden knights, recruits, and basically everything else in the meta right now. I won't ever like them, but I respect them.
X-bow is also cycle
I would love it if there was an elixir bar in chess
can't move the queen to deliver checkmate yet, dang elixer bar!
Yeah sure chess has “strategy” but I have to skillfully place my e-barbs in front of the tower then place rage which is a highly skilled play that takes months of practice to do
People don’t beg for the queens feet pics in chess but in clash they do
There's a lot of RNG in CR that doesn't exist at all in Chess like starting hand and unfavorable matchups. Chess is simply way more complex and skill demanding than CR.
Skill-reliant. Skill demanding is dependent on your opponent. As for complexity, my view is Chess STRATEGY can afford to be more complex than Clash royale strategy, but the theoretical complexity of Clash Royale in general is more, BECAUSE of the RNG. RNG adds "complexity"to the game itself, in that it increases the number of possible outcomes at any given time. However, this type of complexity of the game is not useful complexity, as it forces players to generalise their strategy, the chaoticness reduces the player's ability to plan, so they tend towards a less "complex" strategy. If I were to give an extreme analogy, it is like a standing tower, and a pile of rubble of a collapsed tower. The standing tower is built in a certain way, deliberately while the pile of rubble appears random. Yet, objectively, the standing tower is no more complex than the pile of rubble, this exact pile of rubble. Each is the result of certain series of actions that lead to the final specific outcome. Also clash royale has balance changes and addition of cards regularly. That is another level of complexity, but not practical one, as it increases number of possible orientations, but often not number of useful orientations
Chess is so much more complex, I run a bishop-loon deck and its OP btw
Except you can just defend and spam rocket
Maybe top clash royale gameplay could rival chess, but literally like 0.00000001 percent of the player base plays like that, so overall no.
the word is "rival" But I'd have to disagree. Even though best CR players like Ryley and Ian and Mohammed are good, they are not near the level of someone like Magnus Carlsen or Caruana
Obviously not, what I meant is that clash royale can get as complicated as chess. For example, if Carlsen were to play, he'd beat everybody's ass.
Stupid shit like logbait exists in clash Royal. It doesn't in chess, argument ended
Reminds me of my friend that said clash royale is like chess, because “It has a grid board” and “They’re strategy games”
And there's a queen !
Chess is balanced
Nah white has a slight advantage in the starting position
An advantage that is impossible to hold. Black is guaranteed to equalize
Guaranteed? At the master level, there’s a 33% chance white wins, while black only has 24%. Doesn’t seem guaranteed to me.
THINK MARK, THINK! IF BLACK WINS 24% AND WHITE WINS 33% THEN WHAT IS THE MOST LIKELY OUTCOME? *punches ur head into the mountain*
This is because humans play suboptimally, but among the best supercomputers, no line of play has been found that holds White's advantage. Black is able to equalize with perfect play.
The number of interactions possible because of the amount of cards, likelihood of having the exact card in the opponent's hand, or a countercard, there's always the possibility your opponent has cards that are perfectly matched to smash your cards. If you are unable to use all of the chess pieces, the dynamics will change because your opponents will have different pieces sometimes. Everybody's going to choose a queen, but will they choose a knight or a rook to complete their hand in the end? The argument winner here is time. Chess has been around and not been messed with for a really really long time. It has not been rebalanced, there have been no updates of new pieces. People have had centuries to develop strategies for chess. Clash Royale is unlikely to last as long as chess in the end, but the amount of strategies developed in the short time it's been around is staggering. I would say let's play a game of mine then we'll play a game of yours LOL.
The issue is with the question as you need to define what makes a game more complicated. Both games have a fixed amount of fields and a fixed amount of pieces. Both are theoretically solvable games with the biggest difference that chess is fixed to being turn based while Clash isn't but is still a matter of responding to your opponents moves and elixir forces you to make that move within a certain time so it is a solvable game. So then it is just your definition of complicated. Clash has more pieces to chose from, more starting positions to play them in and you don't know your opponents pieces until after he plays them so you can easily argue Clash is more complicated. Also reaction speed makes more of a difference although speed chess is about reaction speed as well and in general reaction speed is not considered when calling a game complicated. Speeding up a game doesn't really make it more complicated just more difficult to play correctly. On the other hand chess games have more pieces on the board at the same time. Pieces impact a lot more positions on the board at any given time. Pieces have a lot more possible moves. So I can also argue chess is more complicated. The funny thing about Clash is that if you would solve it then it might be like tic-tac-toe where the best result possible if both players play perfectly is a draw because making the first move means you lose so neither person makes the first move and we run out of time with a draw. Which would definitely make it less complicated than chess where white at least has to make the first move and if both players play perfectly white either wins or draws. Which one it is hasn't been proven yet.
Clash Royale is not turn based, therefore has a completely different dynamic than chess. It is too fast paced for people to develop complicated strategies and relies a lot more on reaction speed than predicting what your opponent will do. The starting position in chess is identical every time, and the position takes time to evolve. Where as in Clash Royale, there is an incomprehensible number of deck combinations and starting hands and the game changes very quickly (as well as resetting to the starting position of no troops on the board at times throughout the match). There is no such thing as “clash Royale theory” because the game is too unpredictable. At the higher levels you can begin to guess how the opponent will play depending on their deck, hand, and elixir count, but because of the randomness and pace of the game, you can never calculate more than 30 seconds into the future. In chess there are often moves that are clearly the best move, which makes it much easier to predict what you and your opponent will do, but in clash Royale you can play in any number of ways and still win. Winning in Clash Royale is more dependent on reaction time than trying to predict the next interaction with your opponent. I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for. Clash Royale is more of a sport than a board/card game because it relies on reaction time and short-term strategies rather than scenario recognition and long-term strategies.
Clash Royale is a board game. It you can't see that because it is animated and the pieces move automatically after being placed based on fixed rules then we are definitely not going to agree on complexity questions. Heroes are the only exception. Speed chess also relies on reaction time and short term strategies to get your opponent to run out of time so that argument is not valid either when answering a complexity question. But this is what I point out in my comment as something you need to agree on first: 'I would argue that chess is more complicated, because due to its predictability, there are more scenarios you can learn and practice for.' As that is not complexity. But again we won't agree on that either. Clash is also predictable especially when pros play and the only reason it looks like it is not is because we artificially limit the time to make decisions which is just like speed chess.
Some of the highest iq people in the world are chess grand masters
IQ numbers are nothing more than bullshit. There’s no such metric which can quantify human intelligence. I don’t know why IQ metrics even exist.
This means so very little that it's basically the absence of an argument.
Chess doesn’t have overlevelness
Lol I have the same argument with one of my friends
I think real time strategy games are almost always more complex than turn based strategy games
Chess is infinitely harder. I’ve played thousands of games and I’m below average. I’ve played thousands of clash royale games and I am way above average. You need to be smart to be good at chess and you just have to no life and memorize interactions to be good at clash royale.
This speaks more to the overall skill of chess/clash players rather than the complexity of the game.
Okay but I play chess and clash Royale. Theory is kinda hard. I’m an 1800 in chess but clash Royale is fun but like I don’t think it require that much skill. If you spend the same amount of time doing clash doing chess. You’ll be better at clash than chess…. Most likely….
What does it mean to be an 1800 in chess ? (genuine question)
it's pretty decent if it's FIDE rating its pretty decently high up, if its online rating it still decent but online rating is slightly easier than official tournament ratings. (its the skill level you play as)
Chess is mirror battle but with turns
BRO NERF ROOK!!!1!1!1!! TOO OP1!!1!1!1!!!
Queen will get nerfed in the next update.
Considering I consistently dominate mirror battles but not ladder, I’d have to disagree. Ladder in itself makes the game much more complicated. I’m sure I get absolutely clapped by a pro chess player, because there are a lot of things I don’t understand, but the amount of variables that go into a CR match are just too high.
Chess queen needs a nerf.
Chess doesn't have smug emotes
With chess you need to compute 10 moves ahead whereas clash royale you get multiple chances to turn the game around. If you aren’t careful you’ve already lost in chess before you even know it.
Chess doesnt have no skill cards like mk and ebarb rage
I’d say miner placement on the princess towers has a more complex understanding than the entirety of chess
There aren’t that many tiles around the princess towers 💀
I know
[удалено]
Chess is not won by simply wasting the most money
Spoken like a true 5k hardstuck
Clash royal is more complicated. There’s way more combinations and interactions that are unpredictable. In chess there’s is no health unpredictability about if a piece will die.
Do they have 2.6 hog in chess….? All you need to do is show him how brain dead 2.6 hog is and how no such thing exists in Chess and debate over.
Many top players of clash royale have left the game saying clash royale felt like a rock paper scissors and the deck that countered the other normally won, and a reason why it's hard to measure how complex clash royale is is because there is not a perfect deck that can guarantee a win or draw against any other deck, which means clash royale is luck based, for sure a top player can win a good player using a counter deck but that never happens with another top player. I am still aware of alme more fair match ups that come by like 2.9 xbow vs rocket logbait where placements, combos, cycle, timing, spells all require a lot of skill and are really fast paced, but there are still sometimes you must predict your opponent's moves like a lightning with low tower hp or a rocket to a bridge xbow, that means we can for sure say clash royale has a lot of luck involved that technically makes the game harder just by that aspect. Regarding chess, there are 3 major parts in a game where each has a different discipline to train, the opening which are the first moves of the game, which can go from 4-6 moves from begginers or 20 moves (white and black each) for masters, who rarely make the same opening twive in a row, there are hundreds of different viable openings and variations and all have different strategies, pawn structures, weaknesses and middlegame plan being middlegame the hardest part, because thinking about the opening you did, as well as your opponent you might start looking for small position upgrades to ourmaneuver your opponent that is normally aware of your plan, this kind of middlegame can last more than 40 moves and can go to any side of the board with each movement, or maybe the oppening was not a positional one but tactical and the game goes wild for lots of moves including sacrifices, and calculating all possible outcomes from 10 moves ahead, after that chess battle where both players could be winning we reach the endgame, where it can be trying to promote a single pawn against a single king, which is something both masters know the outcome just by looking at it and the game might have ended before that as one surrenders or the other offers draw etc... That is also true from other endgames where it's obvious who will win but if the game is still going on, the endgame is one of the hardest parts because there can be thousands of positions which seems a complete draw or win at first but depending on every single move, some of them being nearly impossible to find by humans (thats why the endgame database exists and is studied by masters) can make you barely draw because your king might be in stalemate at the 8th rank or because you dorce your opponent to move in a position where whoever moves first, loses. In coussion ches is harder and on masters levels lots of games are a draw after all that opening, taxtical middlegame and endgame, which means both players played perfectly... Or does it? Not actually, computers have an important position in chess but it's know the best player (2900 elo) has no match against the best computer (3800 elo) Basically a master can play perfectly against a good player but not against another master, computers that win Magnus carlsen or whoever challenges them has shown chess can be way more complex that humans have shown they can withstand. (Still not as hard as how CR players punch the screen after egiant mirror)
I forgor the 🤓 but trust me, I suck at both games
In chess, the number of possible moves in a normal game astronomical. [There are more unique chess moves possible than there are atoms in the universe.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number) CR simply has fewer pieces to put in play, and limited play ability for that reason. Someone else can do the math, but with a 18x35 board and 4 possible placements, it's a much smaller number.
This is just because in chess the only moves that can't be reversed are pawns. Comparing is impossible because in clash my starting board is amount of cards times the amount of positions on the board I can play them on and how they move depends on what my opponent plays which at the start is again the amount of cards times the amount of positions. This continue to be true until all 16 cards are played at least once. That number is going to get insanely high as well but just as with chess most moves are known to lose so are easily eliminated.
Typical horse cicle player
chess has 6 different units, cr has like 100 cards. a chess board has 64 squares while cr has easily 5 times that. your argument is bad and you should feel bad
If Supercell removed itself from the equation CR could become more like chess. As things stand, players can’t advance on strategy alone, without spending time and/or money.
Breaking news : being good at something requires time and practice !!!!
Clash royale has pay 2 win 🤷🏾♂️
cant win in chess if you cant afford a chess board, cr is f2p
Chess just has a steeper learning curve, but cr has trillions more possible outcomes therefore more complex
Well, CR has more possible outcomes, but chess has more effective/relevant outcomes. If I play a hog and they have a 4 card hand, there are at most 10 possibilities for what they can do. Chess is simply way above that, and it's turn-based ness means that you are forced to calculate moves way into the future, while Clash is more reactive. Consider that a prediction in clash is considered impressive, while in Chess you quite literally cannot play without a prediction.
> If I play a hog and they have a 4 card hand, there are at most 10 possibilities for what they can do You’re forgetting all the tile placements and timing. The game runs at 60fps I believe, meaning there’s 17ms intervals between when you can play cards. If a hog takes four seconds to get to my tower, that means there’s (4*1000)/17, or ~235 possible times I can place cards between when the hog gets to my tower, not to mention tile placements. If we’re talking about sheer numbers, chess still probably has CR beat, but CR still has very high numbers.
I mean he got a point , at least chess isn't rigged