Answers.Body: <p>Chess engine is just a tool, your question is like asking which calculator your should use for learning mathematics.</p>
  
  <p>An engine will just give you a score and a computer line, it tells you what you <strong>should</strong> play but it doesn't tell you what you <strong>shouldn't</strong> do.</p>
  
  <p>You'll need to work hard, and use the engine to aid your analysis. Consider to pay for a human chess coach.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-10-07T21:22:36.903Z
Answers.Text: The intention of the question was if there are engines that tend to approach the positions from a more positional (or strategic) aspect. The comment below mentioned Komodo, and this seems to be a common perception. However, not sure if this is noticeable for ordinary humans or only on a very subtle level.
Answers.UserDisplayName: acye
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-09-23T00:59:38.403Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-09-23T00:59:38.403Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: SmallChess
Answers.Body: <p>The engine <strong>Komodo</strong> is supposed to be renowned for its positional bent, owing to its emphasis on evaluation over depth. GM Simon Williams mentions this in a YouTube video, and this is also reported on the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_(chess)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia page of the engine</a>.</p>
  
  <p>Unfortunately the engine is proprietary and currently goes for $99.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-09-23T14:21:50.133Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-09-23T14:21:50.133Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Patrick Coulombe
Answers.Body: <p>Rybka has a "deep analysis" feature but it is still too hard for engines to do this work.  You might notice it recommends a move and evaluates the position as +1 or something and then if you play down the line a move or two it changes its mind and it is suddenly +0.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-09-22T23:01:31.680Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-09-22T23:01:31.680Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ywapom
Body: <p>Are there engines are especially recommended for strategic/positional analysis? I'm especially looking to use the engine in complex, opening position.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-08-18T19:34:28.153Z
Comments.Text: In earlier times, [HIARCS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIARCS) was always recommended for these kind of analyses. I'm not sure if it's up to date, though.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-08-18T19:49:26.193Z
Comments.Text: Yeah, I assume these things evolve and change a lot. I found an article from two years ago that recommended Komodo and then Houdini, while a few years ago it was Rybka...
Comments.UserDisplayName: acye
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2017-08-20T14:02:03.357Z
Comments.Text: No chess engine is good for strategic/positional analysis, you will need a chess coach.
Comments.UserDisplayName: SmallChess
Tags: <engines><strategy><positional-play>
Title: Engine with emphasis on strategic/positional analysis
ThreadText: # Engine with emphasis on strategic/positional analysis
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2017-08-18)
  
  Are there engines are especially recommended for strategic/positional analysis? I'm especially looking to use the engine in complex, opening position.
  
  **Tags:** engines, strategy, positional-play
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: In earlier times, [HIARCS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIARCS) was always recommended for these kind of analyses. I'm not sure if it's up to date, though.  
  > **username_0**: Yeah, I assume these things evolve and change a lot. I found an article from two years ago that recommended Komodo and then Houdini, while a few years ago it was Rybka...  
  > **username_2**: No chess engine is good for strategic/positional analysis, you will need a chess coach.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2017-09-23. Score: 2
  
  Chess engine is just a tool, your question is like asking which calculator your should use for learning mathematics.
  
  An engine will just give you a score and a computer line, it tells you what you **should** play but it doesn't tell you what you **shouldn't** do.
  
  You'll need to work hard, and use the engine to aid your analysis. Consider to pay for a human chess coach.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: The intention of the question was if there are engines that tend to approach the positions from a more positional (or strategic) aspect. The comment below mentioned Komodo, and this seems to be a common perception. However, not sure if this is noticeable for ordinary humans or only on a very subtle level.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2017-09-23. Score: 0
  
  The engine **Komodo** is supposed to be renowned for its positional bent, owing to its emphasis on evaluation over depth. GM Simon Williams mentions this in a YouTube video, and this is also reported on the [Wikipedia page of the engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_(chess)).
  
  Unfortunately the engine is proprietary and currently goes for $99.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2017-09-22. Score: 0
  
  Rybka has a "deep analysis" feature but it is still too hard for engines to do this work. You might notice it recommends a move and evaluates the position as +1 or something and then if you play down the line a move or two it changes its mind and it is suddenly +0.
  
  
  ---
  
  