stormbind said:
I am failing abysmally when trying Sicilian (any version), English (any version), or King's Indian Attack.
You are white in all those examples, right? What lines do you prefer against the Sicilian? What formation does the computer use against KIA?
stormbind said:
English, for example, requires immediate tempo to stand up to the attention it draws from the computer: I am forced to push b3, d3, Bb2, and both Knights to fend off vultures including Black Queen and her Bishop friends. Basically, I find myself constricted with no 'projection power'
English is quite a subtle opening, and the best thing with it and one reason that I for one love it is its flexibility. But I can't really see why you can't keep strange ladies and devious clergy-men out of your realm. Again I am curious on what formation the computer adapts.
stormbind said:
Can you suggest any alternatives that would be easy for me to utilise effectively? Here's my current preferred opening..
Here are some very good advice:
Understand the openings you play! Initially you shouldn't bother so much with swatting up tons of variations, but do by all means learn the basic ideas about your openings. Play through some games with great masters, study what their aims are, what middle-game positions they opt for.
Play open games! To aquire good positional understanding, you should start with openings like Giouco Piano, Four Knight's, Two Knight's, Scotch (a terrific beverage as well!) because they are simpler in the strategical sense (this does not in any way imply that they are inferior, of course) and teaches you to play with the pieces.
Play as many different openings at possible! In order to be a good civ3 player you should master playing with e.g Babylon, Zululand, China, India, Byzantium and Inca, on all sorts of map. In chess you should aquire a basic understanding on wild gambits, open positions, closed positions etc,etc. It seems to me that you are about to fall into the trap that is called to play the
system. This means that you will adapt the same pawn formation in every game possible and play it the same way. The danger with this is that it might kill your imagination, diminishing your scope and finally make chess a dull game. In that way you will also get a better idea about what is your strengths and weaknesses and you can:
Play openings that suits you! Do you like to attack? Do you mind sacrificing material for the initiative? Do you prefer a quiet position and slowly build up an initiative on the queen - side? Do you like endgames?
I can use myself as an example. In chess I am the "builder"-type. I like long-range strategic plans and fixed pawn formations. I only go for direct attack on the king if the position demands it. I also don't like to sacrifice if I can't see any concrete compensation. So therefore I like openings like English, Reti, Catalan, QGE, and with black French, Caro-Kann, King's Indian, Dutch stonewall and the Hedgehog.I don't play Evans Gambit, King's Gambit or that sort of things except in 5-minutes games.
soviet said:
well, there's nothing wrong with fianchettos or even double fianchettos, but that h3 bishop is VERY awkwardly placed in my opinion. I guess you could say it's better than g2 in the sense that on g2 it's biting on granite with no scope- but what's it hit on h3, and what pressure can it put on black. Moreover if black plays d6 or d5 sometime in the opening, you'll have to put it on g2.
Very good observations.
The bishop belongs on g2, where it influences the centre
and is less exposed than on h3. The bishop might be biting into granite for the moment, but that will most likely change when white gets going!
soviet said:
Also your queenside fianchetto looks a look awkward too, because if you put the bishop on b2, e3 is a bit of a gap...not that it could be immediately exploited but it doesn't look right...even if you have d4 safely covered, and the rest of the dark squares. the dark squares still look weak to me.
Yes! The bishop should be on the c1-h6 diagonal because it has more scope there, and the bishop on b2 could be walled in by the black pawns.
soviet said:
it isn't bad just tweak it a little and set your move order so you know the order of your setup against whatever black plays. I used to play stuff like this- i'd play a larsen (1. b3) once in awhile, d4/b3/c4/Bb2 kind of systems in Queen's Gambits (I don't remember how I got into it but I think it was like a Catalan or a Catalan)...arg, I should get back into chess.
It is not Catalan - Catalan is queens gambit with g3 - it resembles more the way Rubinstein played QP openings, Yusupov also had a lot of success with it. Perhaps Queen's Indian in advance. In any case it is a rather efficient system which could be recommended. And yes, you most certainly should get back to chess!
soviet said:
the queen or bishops...well, that sounds like your having color complexes, and the queen and bishop help exploit it, probably in combination with knight outposts. don't make holes if possible, try to avoid weak squares.
if it's in the opening your having problems with black's marauding queen- queen moves in the opening (as a general principle, though broken all the time, it isn't steadfast), are usually met by developing moves that attack the queen. like if the game was to go 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Qh4, Nf3 is the sort of thing you'd play. rudimentary bad example but that's all I can come up with. I have to go.
Good advice!
stormbind said:
The h3 bishop pins back the knight commonly sitting on f6 or h6, slowing down their deployment. Having the Bishop there feels more influencial. If at g2, it can do nothing to deter the knight and actually becomes a target for it.
The knight is not so powerful, if you have a good developed position you can just chase it away with h3, if necessary. I have had hundreds of games with a bishop on g2, and I have
never allowed any lousy knight get anywhere near the pride of my position!
stormbind said:
Re: Vulture Queen: Indeed, but with Sicilian and English openings, the pawns are heavilly commited to a certain structure before the Queen appears, making it exceedingly hard to cover all bases.
I need to see any games before I can comment on this, but in general a developed position without too many weaknesses has no reason to fear a lone queen.
I hope this helps and wish you good luck with the further exploring of the royal game.
And please feel free to ask further questions.
