[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by MarkThompson
Tetrahedral Chess. Three dimensional variant with board in form of tetrahedron. (7x(), Cells: 84) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Larry, your idea of showing the cells as points where color-coded lines of movement intersect works well with another idea I've been turning over in my mind. I've never been quite satisfied with the 'Dababantes' that I used as Bishops in this game -- they're color-bound, but that's about the only way they resemble chess Bishops. What I've been thinking of is to designate three of the six lines through each cell as 'rook lines' and the other three as 'bishop lines'. This would make rooks weaker than they were in Tetrahedral Chess, and Bishops would have really equal power to Rooks. In your xiangqi-style board representation, the rook lines might be colored red and the bishop lines blue. If the seven squares of level I where the White pieces begin are considered to be in an 'east-west' row and the seven squares of level VII are in a 'north-south' row, then I would make north-south and two of the vertical edges 'rook lines,' and east-west and the other two vertical edges 'bishop lines.' Neither the rook line edges nor the bishop line edges would make a triangle on the surface of the tetrahedron; they would be symmetrical with one another. And then, I would arrange the Black pieces differently from the White pieces, putting rooks in place of bishops and vice versa, because the orientation of the levels on which the two sides begin would in effect 'turn a rook into a bishop,' if you see what I mean. (Sorry, it's hard to describe without a diagram.) But this is just thinking out loud in public, I haven't tried any of it out yet.
Jared: Are you still going to have the two armies start on opposite edges of the board? That was what prompted me to orient it as I did in my diagrams, rather than the usual idea of a tetrahedron resting on its base. I look forward to seeing your variant. One could also use the basic rhombic dodecahedron grid as a playing space with something other than a tetrahedron as the overall shape of the board. For example one could chop off the corners and make either an octahedral board, or (by chopping smaller pieces) a board with 4 hexagonal and 4 triangular sides. I calculate that an order-6 octahedron would have 146 cells.
Jared: Ah! I think I see (why you're using an order-4 octahedron). Very timely! But opposite faces will have only space for 10 pieces, and the armies are already only separated by 2 layers, if I'm imagining it right. That would mean rather small armies for the space available.
Charles, after reading your latest about the rhombic dodecahedral grid, I thought to look up 'rhombic dodecahedron' in the invaluable Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Geometry, where I found the following tidbits you might find interesting: 'rhombic dodecahedron: Take a three-dimensional cross formed by placing six cubes on the faces of a seventh. Join the centres of the outer cubes to the vertices of the central cube. The result is a rhombic dodecahedron. ... From the original method of construction, it follows that rhombic dodecahedra are space-filling.' [etc.] Indeed, if you imagine space filled with alternating black and white cubes, and perform the construction by dividing up the white cubes into six pyramids apiece and affixing them onto their black cube neighbors, you get the r. d. grid, and this supports your observation that the grid is conceptually identical to the cubic grid with the white cubes removed.
Nova Chess. Members-Only Played on an 8x8 or 10x10 board with a wide range of pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Shafran's Hexagonal Chess. A classic hexagonal variant from Russia.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There is a zrf for Shafran's Hexagonal Chess. It's on the Zillions site listed under 'Hexagonal Chess.'
A Western Xiangqi Board. Proposal to play Xiangqi on a `westernized' board.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Playing on squares doesn't bother me, but I would suggest that -- since the player has to make his own 9 x 10 board anyway -- there is no good reason to make the squares checkered dark and light, because this game doesn't have diagonal sliders. I would probably shade the two fortresses, and maybe also mark the squares that constitute the Elephant's domain with a dot in the middle or something. But the idea of introducing Xiang Qi to westerners with a more western-appearing set sounds reasonable.
Millennium Chess 
. Commercial variant on 15 by 8 board with almost twice the normal set of pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]People like chess variants for lots of reasons, and some prefer the more exotic variants that depart from usual chess with unusual pieces or rules: you don't find that in Millennium Chess. But, without diminishing the exotics, I like the more modest variants also. I've played this one and found it to be pretty good. And yes, it did seem to improve my skills at usual chess, at least temporarily -- or at least my confidence level. When you come back to 8x8 after a few games you have this strange feeling: 'Why, this game will be SIMPLE!' I haven't tried the other variants that are approximately double width and so I can't opine on how this one compares with them. I once communicated briefly with the inventor, who said that while developing M.C. he tried other versions (among them, 8x16) and rejected them. He says having two rooks in the center of the board is too much power there. I expect the choice among wide chesses will also come down to personal tastes.
Game Courier Developer's Guide. Learn how to design and program Chess variants for Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There was a game called Stealth Chess recently that adapted that idea (Stratego-style hidden pieces) as a chess variant. It might be on eBay, or there may be websites on it. Maybe it's even on this site -- guess I should have checked before I started writing.
Shanghai Palace Chess. A blend of Chinese, Japanese, and Western Chess. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Gary, did you try any other opening arrays? I'm curious about whether it's really best to have the Western and Shogi pieces opposite their counterparts. I suppose the Xiangqi pieces would have to be across from each other, because of the opposite-kings rule. And wherever the Xiangqi pieces begin would have to be the fortress. Maybe there could be a 'random opening' version of SPC where the 3 sections are arranged at random at the start of the game, subject to the constraint on the Xiangqi section. Then arranging the pieces within each section might also be done at random, or maybe they could be placed at the players' will, a piece at a time, in alternation.
Seems like this idea of formulaic evaluation of CV's should be written up on a page of its own. A thorough investigation of how the various popular CV's fare under different formulas, and hence of how the formulas ought to be interpreted, would take a lot more exposition than could be done in comments. The challenge is to come up with formulas that will not only 'predict the past', by telling us what we expect them to tell us about well-known variants, but that will also provide useful insights into new games. It's far from obvious that such formulas could be found, but it would be quite a discovery if they were.
Capablanca's chess. An enlarged chess variant, proposed by Capablanca. (10x8, Cells: 80) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Even a formula restricted to the (really pretty well-populated) set of CV's that you specify would be quite interesting, if it can be shown to be valid. For one thing it would probably suggest approaches that could be tried for finding formulas applicable to other kinds of CV's. I'm also agnostic about the existence of such a formula, but I'd be interested in seeing the fruit of the effort, especially if it can all be gathered into a single page.
Shanghai Palace Chess. A blend of Chinese, Japanese, and Western Chess. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]So is someone going to post this fabulous composite picture for us, or must we forever remained tantalized by imagining what she/she/she must look like? Could it be added to the Shanghai Palace page, as an illustration of the concept of blending three different entities into a new whole?
Rules of Chess FAQ. Frequently asked chess questions.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Perhaps the number mentioned is the rating assigned by a computer opponent that evaluates the player, achieved without playing in tournaments against human beings? If so, I'd recommend along with Gary Gifford that the player take part in a tournament at his earliest convenience. News of a chess prodigy would help to promote the game. And I don't think it would be at all bad for the youngster's chess career to come forth and be recognized at that point.
Sankaku Shogi. Small Shogi variant played on a board of 44 triangles with no drops and a teleporting Emperor. (7x8, Cells: 44) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I haven't played it yet, but the game looks good to me also. There's one thing I think should be added to the rules to clarify the Chariot's power of 'running down' soldiers: it wasn't clear to me whether they could run down any number of soldiers in a line, or only one. From the ZRF it seems to be only one.
Chess. The rules of chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Yes, you can castle queenside when the square next to the Rook's starting square is under attack. The King cannot move over any square that is under attack, but that restriction does not apply to the Rook.
Contest to design a chess variant on 44 squares. Our annual N-squares chess variant design competition.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Would that be 45 pieces per army, or 45 pieces among all armies?
Game Courier Tournament #1. A multi-variant tournament played on Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I would be the only person Michael Howe has beaten, and so I think that means I'm the only person who would theoretically be disadvantaged by Fergus's first alternative. So let me remark, for the sake of making the decision easier, that I have no objection to Fergus's first alternative. I'm trying to win my games, of course, or at least to draw, but I'm in the tournament for fun.
Eurasian Chess. Synthesis of European and Asian forms of Chess. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Fergus, a Pawn cannot move to the last rank if there is not a captured piece to which it can promote. In that situation, can a Pawn on the second-to-last rank give check?
Knight Chase. Game played on with two Knights on a Chessboard with differing goals. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]'The two players have different goals, so Knight Moves is probably an unbalanced game,' said Ned. 'And Black, who plays defense, moves first: that must mean that the offense has the natural advantage in this game.' Ted said, 'Well, since you're a beginner, I'll let you play White, and I'll even give you the advantage of the first move.' 'Don't be too cocky, I'm pretty good at games like this,' said Ned. But Ted proceeded to beat him three games in a row. Catching the Black Knight was infernally difficult, even with the advantage of the first move. Then, as they were about to begin the fourth game, Ned suddenly said, 'Hey -- WAIT a minute!' And Ted broke out laughing. What had Ned realized?
Navia Dratp. An upcoming commercial chess variant with collectible, tradable pieces. (7x7, Cells: 49) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I figured out that the title is an anagram of VARIANT PAD. But even if that was intentional, it hardly seems like an adequate excuse for such a perfectly awful name. Does anyone know what inspired 'Navia Dratp' to be called that?
Tandem Chess. 4 player variant where pieces taken from your opponent are given to your partner. (2x(8x8), Cells: 128) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've been thinking of a variant expanding on the Bughouse concept that I call Team Chess (or Team Shogi). I'm envisioning six players on a team, and games taking place between two opposing teams. Two team members play a small variant, two play usual chess, and one plays a large variant; the sixth team member is the captain. All three chess variants being played should use similar armies and rules, so that it won't cause confusion if a piece gets transferred to another board -- perhaps Quickchess, usual chess, and Grand Chess. The winner of the large variant game determines the winning team. When a piece is captured, the capturing team's captain takes it in hand (it changes color) and delivers it to one of his team's five players (captain's choice) to drop at will. The captain can watch all five of the games, but no other communication takes place between the team members once play has begun. I haven't decided what should happen when one of the smaller games ends; should the captain receive all the pieces of the conquered army? None of them? Perhaps just a Prince (non-royal King)?
Game Courier Tournament #1. A multi-variant tournament played on Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating] Anti-King Chess. Each player has both a King and an Anti-King to protect; Anti-Kings are in check when not attacked. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There's a problem with the graphic for Anti-King Chess II: the Black piece at b8 is a King, but it should be a Knight.
Caïssa Britannia. British themed variant with Lions, Unicorns, Dragons, Anglican Bishops, and a royal Queen. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I like the way this game addresses the problem of the too-powerful royal piece (which can make it hard to win the game) by the rule that the queen cannot slide through check. That seems original and yet chesslike, and sounds likely to do the trick. The explanation on this page was a little hard for me to decipher, however: I'd suggest rephrasing somehow to remove the reference to queens capturing other queens. Is 'cover' as you use it here a standard chess term? I hadn't run across it yet. I wish the board had a fourth color, so that each dragon would be restricted to squares of one color. Shouldn't there be a piece for Ireland? A Harp, perhaps? No idea what it would do, though. 'There must be dozens of possible names that would suit it better and have the advantage of being offensive.' Surely Charles simply forgot to type the word 'not' in this sentence. 'the three heraldic-based pieces could be considered 'brutish'.' I imagine Charles G's use of 'brutish' harks back to the use of 'brute' to mean 'beast,' which is comprehensible enough. The idea that a CV inventor's choice of a name should be second-guessed at length is certainly odd, though.
Wildebeest Chess. Variant on an 10 by 11 board with extra jumping pieces. (11x10, Cells: 110) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The basic idea of the game is that, as there are two simple sliders (B, R) and one combination slider (B+R=Q), so in Wildebeest Chess there are also two simple jumpers (Knight = (1,2) jumper and Camel = (1,3) jumper), and one combined jumper (Wildebeest = N+C). I wonder how well the idea would work instead with Knights and Zebras ((2,3) jumpers), and a combination N+Z piece? There is the idea that, as one of the sliders is color-bound, so perhaps one of the jumpers ought to be also, hence the Camel. But it's not obvious to me that rule makes for the best game. I'd be interesting in knowing whether Wayne Schmittberger or anyone else has tried it. Actually, since the preset to enforce the rules has not been written for this game yet, it would be possible to try playing this way, simply entering Zebra moves for Camels and Knight/Zebra moves for the Wildebeest.
Flying Chess. Some pieces can fly. (2x(8x8), Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The name 'Harrold Pooter' certainly sounds pseudonymous, being so similar to the hero of J. K. Rowling's books.
Rules of Chess FAQ. Frequently asked chess questions.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If this is the square you're proposing the white King to move to, I don't see how the move puts him in check. [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][p][ ] [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] Caps are black, lowercase are white [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][P] [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [p][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [k][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [ ][ ][K][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
Game Courier Logs. View the logs of games played on Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Perhaps the server should also prevent people from creating invitations under game-names that are known to be trademarked, at least for games whose owners are known to be particularly protective of their legal rights.
I think it would be useful to have a field on the Game Courier move-entry form for 'annotations', which would be for comments a player makes on his own moves, but which would not be displayed until the game is over. Would people use such a field? If we did, I think it would increase the value to CV students of the library of games that the system is creating.
Tony, that sounds like a good idea. Something like 'the World against Kasparov.' Maybe the winner of the CV tournament could play one side and 'the world' could play the other? Or, just 'the world against the world.'
Grand Chess. Christian Freeling's popular large chess variant on 10 by 10 board. Rules and links. (10x10, Cells: 100) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've suggested in the forum that the Games Courier might implement a 'The World Against ...' system, whereby a champion at some variant would play White and everyone else plays Black. 'The World' can use a public forum to discus possible lines of play and could vote (in a strict time-span) on which move to make. Grand Chess would be a good game to investigate this way, because Mindsports Arena has held tournaments some years back, so it has recognized champions: Wayne Schmittberger and John Vehre. Either 'The World Against Vehre' or 'The World Against Schmittberger' would be great fun, I think, if either party could be enlisted for it.
Ultima. Game where each type of piece has a different capturing ability. Also called Baroque. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Robert Abbott now has a set of Ultima puzzles on his website! http://www.logicmazes.com/games/puz1to4.html
If Japan and the US have an extradition treaty, does anyone know why Fischer is still in Japan? Are they refusing to extradite him for some reason?
It does seem odd for someone to get in trouble for 'merely' playing chess, but remember that economic sanctions are supposed to serve an important purpose--namely, as a last-ditch effort to avoid a war. The US (acting in concert with other countries, hooray) had imposed such sanctions against Yugoslavia, Fischer knew about it and blew it off. I'll grant you, of course, that the military actions Clinton eventually resorted to would probably have been necessary even if Fischer had complied. (In fact, forget 'probably', of course they would have been necessary.) But that will always be true of any single individual who defects from the program, and if we make a regular practice of not enforcing economic sanctions after we declare them, then we're not really making as much effort to avoid war as we could. And that would be a Bad Thing.
freebobby.org seems to have vanished--anyway, my service is telling me it can't be found. (an hour later) ... Woops, there it is now. I guess if your ISP can't find it you should try again a little later.
I hope Mr. and Mrs. Fischer are very happy in their marriage. But this business of the Japanese holding him prisoner on false charges is disturbing. Surely the Japanese do not customarily hold people on false charges? Are we quite certain that the charges are not in fact true? I hope no one would assume automatically that anything alleged against a man admired for his chess expertise is false.
XYMYX. Players make their moves at the same time. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If I wanted to play a game over-the-board, I think I would create a system in which each player would write down his move and they would reveal them simultaneously. If they finish so close together that it's not obvious which finished first they could flip a coin.
Grotesque Chess. A variant of Capablanca's Chess with no unprotected Pawns. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Here's that page I couldn't find before, that describes how to make fairy chessmen out of regular Staunton pieces: http://www.chessvariants.org/crafts.dir/fairy-chess-pieces.html It's listed in the alphabetical index under 'How to make ...', but I think it would be better to list it in the index page of the Crafts section: http://www.chessvariants.org/crafts.dir/index.html As I say, I've used the technique described to make a Marshall and Cardinal, though I haven't followed the full instructions for dismembering a whole chess set to make the full range of pieces the author shows. But I have enough to make an attractive set for Grotesque Chess.
Ambiguous Chess. A modest variant, similar to Refusal Chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Alternatively, you could castle by pointing to two squares, and declaring you intend to make a move that will occupy both of them. Since the only way that could be done would be by castling, it could not be refused.
Carrera's Chess. Large chess variant from 17th century Italy. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Touche! :-) I wrote that years ago and have forgotten the wording enough that when I reread it nowadays I keep thinking, criminy, what pompous a$$ wrote this stuff?
Tony Quintanilla is a new Father. Our Chess Variant Pages editor's new creation![All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Welcome Paloma and congratulations Tony! Excellent name, and I hope she grows up in a peaceful world.
Wildebeest Chess. Variant on an 10 by 11 board with extra jumping pieces. (11x10, Cells: 110) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I'd have to agree after our game of 'Zebrabeest Chess' (thanks to Greg Strong for setting that up on the courier) that Wildebeest C. is much better.
Contest to design a 10-chess variant. Cebrating 10 years of Chess Variant Pages with a contest to design a chess variant.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]That triangular arrangement of 10 objects is sometimes called the 'tetraktys.'
The links to the other contests don't seem to be working.
Experiments in Symmetry. Several experimental games to test whether perfect symmetry makes a game better.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If you really want to go for the ultimate in symmetry, I would suggest we need to do away with the notion of a square board. A square has only eight symmetries: reflection NS or EW, 180 degree rotation, or any (or no) combination of these. Indeed, the ultimate in symmetry would be to do away with the board's edges: the board should be infinite, hence giving it translational as well as reflectional symmetry. And we should do away with the notion of cells within the board: the most symmetrical 2-dimensional object being the entire Euclidean plane, in which any point is equivalent to any other. Then we have complete rotational symmetry, about any point, as well as translations and reflections. But since we're pursuing symmetry as the ultimate goal here, we need to embolden ourselves to take the next vital step as well. To do away with the last vestiges of ugly asymmetry, we must also abolish the pieces: for once pieces are introduced into our pristine continuum, they render the game asymmetrical again, by causing some points and directions to have more importance than others: in particular, the points pieces occupy, and the directions they would need to move to attack other pieces, would have special importance. Our ultimate, perfectly symmetrical chess must therefore consist of an infinite plane with NO PIECES AT ALL. It might be objected that without pieces it will be difficult to state rules of movement, capture, initial setup, and object. But clearly, since we desire a perfectly symmetrical game, we must abolish these notions as well: because the perfectly symmetrical chess game must be symmetrical in time as well as in space, and therefore it must have no beginning, no end, and no change: the state of the game at any point must be the same as its state at any other point. And so, at last, we have our perfectly symmetrical game: no cells, no pieces, no goal, no players: is not its perfect, chaste serenity a thing of beauty? Have we not achieved true theoretical perfection? And can we not get back to discussing real chess games now?
Chess. The rules of chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Does anyone have any quantitative information about the advantage White has over Black? The kind of thing I'd like to know is: supposing two experienced, average rated players, with equal ratings, play many games against each other until 100 games have ended decisively (not in draws), how many should we expect to have been won by White? Is it 55-45, or 60-40, or what? Supposing our pair of equal players were more skilled than average, does that make it closer or farther to 50-50? Another thing that would be of interest: supposing we experiment with matching many pairs of unequally-rated players, with the stronger player playing Black, until we find pairs in which the White-win, Black-win ratio is 50-50: will we find any consistency in the number of rating points that separate the two players? Does playing White worth 20 points to your rating? 40 points? 100 points??
Symmetrical Chess Collection Essay. Members-Only Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Greg Strong wrote: 'When exact refutations to every single opening can be calculated, and are published, then professional Chess will no longer be a game of Chess skill, but rather just a game of memorization. Ok, you could still try to substitute Chess skill, but a person with a fantastic memory will probalby clean your clock.' Indeed, I feel we have already witnessed the Scrabble-ization of Chess: the step from amateur to tournament player already requires loads of rote memorization. However, if we switch to Grand Chess the number of openings will be far greater and hence harder to learn, for any human being (without cyborg cortical implants); if we switch to any variant with a large number of variable opening setups, I think it will be impossible. The objection someone made to Mercenary Chess that whatever makes the 'best' army and opening setup would be soon discovered misses one of the points: the best army and opening setup for White would depend on the army and opening setup Black is using, and vice versa; hence if they choose them one piece at a time it would be unlikely that the same one would always be used. Also, remember that there's a 'catalog' of pieces with prices: I should have stipulated that the catalog offerings and prices would continually be reviewed by the World Mercenary Chess Federation, which would periodically raise the prices of pieces in the greatest demand and lower the prices of pieces no one wants to hire. Also the WMCF might introduce new pieces from time to time. Hence, I don't believe exhaustion could ever happen. Computers may play better than humans. But we're still a long way from building a machine that can enjoy the game as much as we can.
Symmetrical Chess Collection Essay. Members-Only Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
The Game of Jetan. Extensive discussion of various versions of the rules of Jetan. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]One possible drawback to playing any CV with a wagering system based on putting a price on each piece is that it seems it would make the game more materialistic. One of the endearing features of Chess is that its focus on the Kings makes spectacular sacrifices for the sake of achieving checkmate worthwhile. But if the point of the game is to end with the greatest value of pieces still on the board, I think this aspect will be lost. A player who hopes to win would play conservatively, trying to keep his own pieces on the board rather than let their value fall into the hands of his opponent, while a player who fears losing would try to make exchanges, thereby reducing the value of the ultimate prize for the winner. For whatever it's worth, I proposed a variant called 'Contract Jetan' in a letter to a 2001 issue of Abstract Games magazine, which went about like this: In Contract Jetan, a player could propose in mid-game some rule change that would make it more difficult for his opponent to win, accompanied by a 'proffer' of some tokens that would be added to the ante if the opponent accepts the dare. Such a proposal would probably be made by the player in a weaker position. For example, 'You must win in the next 15 moves or forfeit,' or 'My Thoat can only be captured by your Warrior', etc. If the opponent accepts the rule change, the proffer is added to the ante and the rule change is in effect. If the opponent refuses, then the player who offered it has the option of 'buying out the contract' as follows: from the proffer he removes a number of tokens equal to the excess of value of the other player's army over his own, plus his own Chief's value, and gives that to his opponent; then he adds the rest of the proffer to the ante, and rotates the board half a turn. Then they play on, but having reversed their roles, and with the proposed rule change in effect. This variant is played in an unpublished work that ERB left unfinished, 'Corporate Lawyers of Mars.'
Capablanca Random Chess. Randomized setup for Capablanca chess. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Just curious, why 3 or fewer? Rather than zero?
I've read that the USA has an extradition treaty with Iceland also.
Bario. Pieces are undefined until they move. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]My impression on reading the rules was that when a player defines his last piece, all of THAT PLAYER's pieces go back to being undefined, but the description on the page doesn't specifically limit it to the player's own pieces. Did anyone else have the same idea?
Also, if we were requiring that friendly Bishops occupy squares of opposite colors, it could be possible to deduce that the last Bario on light-colored squares (or dark) has to be a Bishop. If there were four Barios left, two on light and two on dark squares, being a Knight, a light-square Bishop, and two Rooks, and I move one of my light-square Barios as a Knight, that would set of a chain reaction that would define all four pieces -- and, in the version that seems most natural to me, would therefore reset all my pieces, though not my opponent's. One reason I like the idea of requiring opposite-color Bishops and independent, one-player resets is that it would make this kind of combination more likely, and more desirable.
I just had another thought: what if captures with Barios were obligatory? No, that wouldn't work, unless you change the geometry and opening setup. But oh, what combinations ...
I think the mechanism -- having an important game event triggered by whether something can be deduced by a decision of one of the players, along with the 'natural laws' operating within the game (in this case, the known composition of the armies) -- is interesting in itself. In fact I think it might achieve more of its potential in a game that's based much less tightly on usual chess. (Sometimes I wonder whether the same thing might hold true of Extinction Chess's concept.)
Dave's Silly Example Game. This is Dave Howe's example of a user-posted game. (2x2, Cells: 4) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]How can we make the text of our user-submitted pages use the proportional fonts that are standard on most of the CVP, rather than the monospace type that I got by default? Is there an html tag we should add?
Thanks David and Greg! Looks much better now. This is a great new facility!
Synchronous Chess. Chess played with written simultaneous moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I think you could implement something in Zillions that would work like this game. My plan would be, program 3 players: the computer has to play first, then the user, then a 'neutral' player. The computer's moves would take place on an invisible 'side' board, then the human player would make a move (not having been able to see the computer's move: you'd have to close the panel that shows the move notations), and then the 'neutral' player would make his move, which would always be to transfer the computer's moves from the invisible board to the visible one. If the transfer caused conflicts the neutral player would have to do something complicated to resolve them. You could never have the computer move second, or zillions would use the information about the human player's move.
Salmon P. Chess. Huge three-dimensional game celebrating 10 years chess variant pages. (10x(), Cells: 7500) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I don't think I've ever used the ratings on pages. When I see a game that sounds interesting to me I read it, otherwise I don't. Do other people search specifically for highly-rated games? If no one pays any more attention to ratings than I do, it doesn't seem worth getting upset over someone 'forging' a high rating for himself.
Synchronous Chess. Chess played with written simultaneous moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Yes -- to play a game like this well the computer would have to use what's called 'classical' game theory rather than, I suppose, 'combinatorial' game theory. In classical game theory, which is used for games of simultaneous movement, the possible choices for each player form the rows / columns of a matrix, and the entries of the matrix describe the value of the result to one of the players. The optimal strategy for each player is a vector giving the probability that the player should give to each possible choice. If the matrix is known then the calculation of the optimal strategies is straightforward. But the conventional ways of evaluating the value of a game position for standard chess would not apply here, so figuring out the entries to the matrix would be difficult. It might be a good research project for some grad student studying game theory, though.
By 'algorithmatization', do you mean finding an algorithm by which a player can be certain not to lose? That's a good question. I thought at first it was obvious that no such algorithm could be found, since Synchronous Chess is not a perfect-information game, but as I think about it a second time, I realize it's not so obvious. But I think it's unlikely there could be such an algorithm. Luck is a factor.
If the players are cooperating, why do you need two of them?
Rules of Chess FAQ. Frequently asked chess questions.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Except, I think, in an 'official' chess tournament, where I'm told that announcing check is considered rude by some.
What would be wrong with putting a length-limit on user ID's to prevent this problem from recurring? Perhaps characters like at and slash should be prohibited as well.
'I think in this instance and only in this instance should you add all the points of pieces captured in order to determine the winner.' John, you could make a case that the chess variant played that way would be better than Chess, and certainly you and your opponent have the right to play that way if you like. The only caution I would advise is that, since those are not the standard rules of Chess, you'd better make sure you and your opponent both agree to those rules before you start, or else someone might end up with hard feelings after the game is over. (This reminds me of the aftermath of the 2000 election ...)
Another question would be whether people with high IQs are smarter than other people. Chess and other mentally taxing games are said to ward off Alzheimer's, which is somewhat related to your topic. I would guess, though, that if there is anyone who doesn't enjoy playing chess, but plays it anyway in hope of becoming smarter, then it won't work for that person.
Showdown Chess. No draws permitted. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Hmm. Some of these rules will probably need to be spelled out more. For instance, it's illegal to make a move that results in insufficient mating material. Does that mean that when either player gets down to a set of pieces that can't be reduced further and still be able to force mate, his remaining pieces become uncapturable? But won't the conventional ideas of how much material is sufficient to force mating have to be revised, in light of this invulnerability rule? And the fact that no move is allowed that would result in stalemate might also affect the issue, I think. More fundamentally, is it allowed for one player to be reduced below the level where he could force mate, as long as the other one is not?
Congo. Animals fight on 7 by 7 board. (7x7, Cells: 49) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The 'drowning rule' in Congo is original and interesting, but it seems to me that it makes it awfully difficult to get an attack going. If you push a piece into the River, your opponent has the option of immediately making a counterattacking move that needs an immediate defensive response, which forces you to lose the piece in the River. It almost seems as though you're better off waiting for the other player to attack and let him be the one whose pieces drown. Does anyone know just how the good players avoid this problem? Someone once observed that one of the general problems in designing a good strategy game is figuring out how to force the players to be aggressive, since many games tend to favor passive play unless a mechanism is introduced to force conflict. This makes me suspect that Congo might be a better game if the drowning rule, which seems to discourage conflict, were revised somehow: perhaps, a piece (or at least a Pawn) should be allowed to stay in the River one turn without drowning? Any suggestions?
'most chess pieces are symmetrical along a vertical axis, and I simply haven't the slightest idea how to do it with the software that comes with Windows.' In MS Paint, make sure you uncheck the option 'Draw Opaque' under 'Image', and then draw the left- or right-half of your image. Leave the rest of the image white. Then select all, copy, and while the copy is selected, choose Image / Flip-Rotate / Horizontal. That will flip the 'copy' to its own mirror-image. Then you can adjust its position with the mouse to line up with the other half.
Strip off HP laserprinter headers? Sorry, no idea on that one--not even sure I understand the question. Maybe someone else knows.
'And as far as piece names go, no need to justify your choices. Piece names are the prerogative of the inventor ...' Not only that, but those of us who construct our own sets will ultimately just call the pieces by the names we like, and switch to 'official' names only for online discussions if needed. Just like players started calling the elephant a bishop. For instance I always call a B+N a Cardinal, regardless of anyone who wants me to call it an Archbishop. And if I ever get around to making a Navia Dratp set, I'm gonna make a LOT of changes ... Like that poem, 'The Moon': 'You say it's made of silver, I say it's made of cheese. For I am an American, And say what I d*** please.'
Congo. Animals fight on 7 by 7 board. (7x7, Cells: 49) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Regarding possible 'fixes' for the drowning rule (if anyone agrees with me that it needs fixing), what if we declared that the river contains 'islands' at b4 and f4, and any piece can remain on those squares indefinitely without drowning? The crocodile's move is unaffected. This might allow the river still to have an effect on play, but also allow players to launch attacks more easily. Would anyone like to try it?
AIGO Chess. International chess with Cannon pieces added. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I believe you're mistaken in saying the cannons can capture one another in the opening setup. They only go over one piece in making a capture, and they're separated by two pawns.
Storm the Ivory Tower. A Smess adaptation of Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I also prefer the 'optical illusion' board. I prefer plain things over garish. And the idea of checkering it sounds very reasonable to me too.
Game Courier Ratings. Calculates ratings for players from Game Courier logs. Experimental.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've always thought the best implementation of ratings would be an 'open-source' approach: make public the raw data that go into calculating the ratings, and allow many people to set up their own algorithms for processing the data into ratings. So users would have a 'Duniho rating' and a 'FIDE rating' and 'McGillicuddy rating' and so on. Then users could choose to pay attention to whichever rating they think is most significant. Over time, studies would become available as to which ratings most accurately predict the outcomes of games, and certain ratings would outcompete others: a free market of ideas.
'I also like the open-source approach (maybe make the raw data XML, plain-text, or both), but there should also be one built-in to this site as well, so if you don't have your own implementation you can view your own.' Sure, the site should have its own 'brand' of ratings. But I mean, it would be good to make ratings from many user-defined systems available here also. Just as the system allows users to design their own webpages (subject to editorial review) and their own game implementations, there could be a system whereby users could design their own ratings systems, and any or all these systems could be available here at CVP to anyone who wants to view them, study their predictive value, use them for tournament matchings, etc. Of course, it's much easier to suggest a system of multiple user-defined rating schemes (hey, we could call it MUDRATS) than to do the work of implementing it. But if enough people consider the idea and feel it has merit, eventually someone will set it up someplace and it will catch on.
Navia Dratp. An upcoming commercial chess variant with collectible, tradable pieces. (7x7, Cells: 49) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]As far as the aesthetics of the game are concerned, I'm completely with Michael Howe. The forms of the pieces are repulsive, the bizarre names for everything (including the game itself) pointlessly ugly. But I've played at least half a dozen games, and the game itself is very good. I can hardly wait for the copyright to run out, so I can create an isomorphic game with sensible, euphonic names and pleasant-looking pieces. WHY does anyone create ugliness when beauty is within easy reach? I suppose I could make my own version even now, but they deserve to make money on their invention from people like me as long as they're trying to, so eventually I'll probably buy their equipment. But not without gnashing my teeth.
'Is Lord Kiggoshi such a terrible name?' No, Kiggoshi does sound Japanese. But Chugyullas, Coydrocomp, Nebguard? Gyullas (to mean simply Money)? Dratp (to mean simply Promote)? As you say, we have different tastes. And the names don't spoil the game for me, because when I'm playing I don't think about them.
Energy crystals, money, what's the difference. It's stuff you earn by doing something and pay out to get privileges: by me that's money. And while I agree that dratping isn't exactly the same as promoting, the concept is close enough. A space elevator isn't exactly an elevator, but calling it that makes the idea clearer than coining a new word that's unrelated to anything in the language -- AND is either almost-unpronouncable or has a silent letter, what's with that? Silent letters are vestiges of pronunciations from earlier times, what's the point of including one in a new coinage? My aesthetic preferences are admittedly my own, and though I feel I have good reasons behind them, I don't expect everyone else to share them. These things depend on individual judgment, sentiment, and taste. As I've already said, it's a fine game.
This seems like an interesting, simple idea. Since Knights gain so much power as to be a problem, I wonder whether it would be good to play Diana Chess (6x6 board with no Knights) with this 'One Double-Move' rule.
Another possible variation to address the overstrong knight problem would be to use a standard board but replace the knights with other pieces, such as Horses (like knights but without the ability to jump over an orthogonally-adjacent piece), or Burmese Elephants (Shogi's Silver General). I like this idea, it seems like an ingredient that could enhance many different chesses. Maybe there should be a regular page for this game.
The Mammoth is almost the same as a Giraffe in Congo, except that a Girffe cannot capture when making a King's move.
You mean 'patent'. Only a text can be copyrighted.
Castling in Chess 960. New castling rules for Fischer Random Chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]'But clearly, Fide chess is approaching a crisis. It could soon be renamed 'Opening Study Chess'. It's becoming ridiculous. I think there are two ways of meeting this challenge. (1) Follow Capablanca's proposal and increase the board size, or (2) introduce a form of drop-chess along Burmesian lines, as my own proposal Swedish Chess.' I think there is an option (3), or at least (2b), which is what I've called 'Mercenary Chess'. Let us start a world CV organization that maintains a catalog of pieces, perhaps a bit less inclusive than the Piececlopedia, but with a price for each piece, measured in points. (The organization should have some system for monitoring the empirical value of different pieces based on their observed usefulness in tournament play, and adjusting prices periodically based on what they learn.) Each player starts with 1000 points, or perhaps it should be 100 points per file on the rectangular board chosen, and the players start the game by alternately purchasing their starting pieces and dropping them on the board. Such a system would be amenable to handicapping, by giving one player a few more points than the other. Equal players might decide to give Black a few more points to compensate for moving second. This idea has been proposed in various forms by several people. I think I heard that Bob Betza was first, calling an idea very much like this one 'Generalized Chess.'
'Chess Master/Grand Masters will never accept a new game that takes away their book opening knowledge advantage.' No, I wouldn't expect them to; they have too much invested in their study of openings. But if I'm optimistic about the future of Chesslike games, it's from hoping that the next generation, who haven't become Chess experts, might be attracted to CV's.
I'm not convinced that these tournaments really identify a 'best player in the world' (most of the time), or even that there is such a thing (most of the time). If you were to apply statistical theory to the results and calculate a confidence level, I doubt that the hypothesis that 'Kramnik is better than Topolov' would get anywhere near the 95% confidence that's considered standard for scientific purposes.
Flip Chess and Flip Shogi. Pieces have two sides with different movements on board of 38 squares. (7x6, Cells: 38) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]This page says that Pawns move as in usual chess, but it doesn't explicitly say they have the power of a doublestep on their first move. Since the board is so small I would assume that they don't. Does anyone know what the inventor intends?
In Flip Shogi, when a Prince (promoted Pawn) is captured, can the capturing player drop it as a Prince, or only as a Pawn?
Would it make sense to put a filter on the comments to disallow messages with the subjects 'Bill', 'Hillary', and 'Bush'? If it's a robot spamming us this way it might not be smart enough to adapt.
Meta-Chess. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I got a reply to my own recent letter to John William Brown, in which he tells me that he's working on a revised version to come out next year. If I understood correctly the new edition will include some new material. He'll update the info on the webpage here when it's ready.
Flip Chess and Flip Shogi. Pieces have two sides with different movements on board of 38 squares. (7x6, Cells: 38) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The author tells me (in a letter) that pawns cannot doublestep, and that the Shogi drops put promoted pieces back to their original form. So I guess that means a captured Prince (being a promoted Pawn/Berlin Pawn) turns back into one or the other when dropped.
Navia Dratp. An upcoming commercial chess variant with collectible, tradable pieces. (7x7, Cells: 49) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]It looks like Bandai's website for this game is defunct, and most other online information refers people to the Bandai website for the complete rules. Perhaps we should add descriptions of all the pieces here?
Airplane Chess. Airplanes move as queens any distance, capturing by landing just beyond an enemy unit.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I love the idea of buying pieces for each game, and wish someone would implement this on a server. (Wouldn't that be a terrific attraction to add to the growing gamesmagazine-online website, for instance!) That's the only idea for a CV I've ever heard that would actually merit being forecast as 'the future of Chess.' The piece values and the players' budgets for hiring their armies would have to depend on the size and shape of the board, right? And probably on the relative strength of the players -- one thing that strikes me as especially appealing about this concept being its usefulness for handicapping.
The Airplane seems to be the same piece as the Grasshopper, unless I'm missing something. Airplane figurines would probably be easier to find than Grasshoppers, though, and less creepy.
Oops, no it's not. Grasshoppers MUST jump something to move, and can't jump friendly pieces.
Seirawan Chess. invented by GM Yasser Seirawan, a conservative drop chess (zrf available).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I rather doubt that we're going to address the problem of the future of chess. It will either evolve into something new and worthy without anyone's planning it, or it will go softly into the night as checkers and bridge seem to be doing. The chief problem chess faces, in my opinion, is Scrabblization. By this I mean that chess has become a game like Scrabble, in which an enormous amount of rote memorization has become almost as important, or perhaps even more important, as strategic and tactical intuition -- and this is especially so for one making the move from casual amateur to serious tournament player. Like lovers of checkers and bridge, experts who have invested that effort are emphatic that they're glad they did. But that doesn't attract others to follow after when there are plenty of other strategy games without so much 'book' where they can hope to excel just by having a knack. This is just my partly-informed opinion based on remarks I've heard from better players, so I readily admit I could be completely off-base -- I'm no expert at chess. But if I'm right, then chess has gone so far down the road toward Scrabble that, at this point, I'm suspicious that those who are experts have acquired a distorted view of the game during their years of study. Reading whole books devoted to variations on a single line of play, memorizing openings out to twenty moves, is certainly not what the inventor of Chess had in mind. This is why I think something like the random-array or (better still) the player-selected-army variants are the likeliest future for chess, if it's to have one at all.
100 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.