Comments by Pokshtya
Please pay attention to ALL PHRASES in the description of W/L Conditions
Win/Loss Conditions
After your move:
- By giving check to two of your opponent's Wild Roses at the same time, you win the game (checkmate)
- If two of your Wild Roses are in check (under attack), you win the game (blossom roses)
- Leaving your opponent without pieces (only with Wild Roses) - you win the game (fading roses)
- Leaving one of your Wild Roses under attack means you lose the game (rose cutting)
Winning Conditions always prevail over the only Losing Condition. Or in other words, the first one to fulfill one of the three winning conditions wins.
There is no missing in the second sentence is "at the end of your turn".
Win/Loss Conditions
After your move:
You're right. The more Wild Roses a player has, the more difficult it is for him to maneuver. If we remember the famous chess problem about eight queens, then a lot will become clear. However, fortunately, as in standard chess, reaching the last rank with a pawn is not so easy.
You are absolutely right!
Okay, done.
- If two of your Wild Roses are in check (under attack), you win the game (blossom roses)
to H.G. Muller
'are put in check' means a literal transition from static to dynamic. To win by Blossom Roses you have to move one of your pieces. I don't see any problem with the expression 'if two of them are in check' but saying 'are put in check' we are talking about the dynamics of events. Of course, we can use various words like 'to place', 'to expose' etc. I think I tried to convey the idea correctly.
" If the Pawn would just change into an enemy Rose on the promotion square, the opponent would also have an extra Rose." This makes it harder to win. By having the choice of 'planting' a new Rose where it benefits him, the player significantly increases his chances of success. I don't know if I can post pictures here, but I would show it very well with examples.
to Lev Grigoriev
Лев, да я все понимаю и сталкивался с этим уже не раз тут. Спасибо за слова поддержки!
Wild Rose is not a chess King. It can give check and be in check. I use the word 'in check' to mean 'under attack'. Please see here for more details https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/wild-rose-chess There is no need to measure the game by standard chess standards. This is NOT STANDARD chess. Win/Loss Conditions are very clear. To win the game with one of the three Winning Conditions YOU MUST MAKE A MOVE. Thus, if I leave my two Wild Roses under attack AFTER MY TURN IS ENDED, then I win. It will no longer be your opponent's turn. And he won't be able to say that he's attacking my two Wild Roses.
"Also, what happens if you have more than two Wild Roses? How does that affect win/loss conditions?" Answer: None You can have as many as 16 Wild Roses. If two of them are put in check AFTER YOUR OPPONENT'S MOVE, you lose, if two of them are put in check AFTER YOUR MOVE, you win.
"It is not clear to me what 'putting your Wild Roses into check' means, though." Answer: 'putting your Wild Roses into check' means putting your WR's under attack. AVOIDING CHECK IS NOT NECESSARY, but it does affect on Win/Loss Conditions. AVOIDING CHECK IS NOT NECESSARY - THERE IS NO KINGS in the game. Check is just a threat like saying GARDE to op's queen.
"Perhaps except in case of a promotion. The rules for that seem unnecessarily complicated." Answer: You are absolutly wrong. The more Wild Roses your opponent has, the easier it is to win the game. Again see examples here https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/wild-rose-chess
During the first day of publication on chess.com, I received more than a dozen positive feedbacks about the game. Not a single negative one.
Лев спасибо огромное! Разобрался. раньше такого не было вот и запутался. Спасибо еще раз!
Спасибо за помощь! То есть Edit Metadata for this Page? но там нет переключения с привата на общий доступ. Все остается без изменений.
Thank you! Check out my idea on this topic https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/neo-andernach-chess
Now Battle of Kings can be played at https://www.schemingmind.com/default.aspx
You can play against a bot using the link (no registration required): https://dagazproject.github.io/checkmate/botk-board.htm
The bot, of course, plays very weakly, which is not surprising: Battle of the Kings is the only chess variant with complete information in which AI is absolutely powerless.
From the starting position it is not possible to make two moves with pawns from columns b and g. For example, p b11-b10 and p b12-b11 for black. Since the first move is not displayed on the board, on the square where the piece that made the first move stood, you cannot place another piece on your second move.
Firstly, I am not a programmer, so I just don’t know HOW this is done, and secondly, even if I were one, I would consider such actions simply not correct on my part. I mean to interfere with the site's line of games, which, as I understand it, have some criteria for the implementation of the game by correspondence.
A two-move knight is certainly not a Nightrider, but still ... In some cases, in the endgame, promoting a pawn into a knight by the first move, you can immediately hit the opponent's king by the second move.
Dear Sirs! Could you please make this chess variant available to play by correspondence on your site. Many fans of chess variants show interest in the game, but do not have the opportunity to play on the site where the experimental tournament is currently taking place. I would recommend such users to play on chessvariants.com
Thank you for your comment! I will definitely clarify in the rules that the game is played on a rectangular board. I'm not at all against criticism or specific comments regarding the game. This helps to detect deficiencies and correct them in a timely manner. Any discussion regarding the actual process of the game is welcome. At the end of this tournament, I will definitely send all materials on this game to your email address specified in your profile or to this address chessvar@yahoo.com It is difficult for me to judge how long this tournament will take. Everyone plays two games with everyone and the time control is 10 days per game + 12 hours per move. Considering that the level of players is very different, and the resulting pawn endings are extremely complex, it can take a long time for a tournament with such time control. I must say that my search for the perfect initial setup for Double Chess or Double King Chess started a long time ago. I experimented with different starting positions, but the problem of two kings always remained. To exchange the second king for a third queen or a fairy piece means to change the name and concept of Double Chess. When I saw Quadruple Besiege Chess by Charles Gilman I immediately realized that this is exactly what Double Chess should look like. The idea of a double move was born from the formula: two boards + two players + two kings (two sets of pieces). Yes, the columns of pawns seemed awkward, but when testing the game, it turned out that such a structure of pawns is almost ideal. For comparison, you can look at the gameplay in Double Move Pawn Chess by Galvin. We can say that Double Move Double Chess is a game of two phases: first, a game with long-range pieces and if you manage to survive in this mess, then the transition to interesting and unusual pawn endings, where the very concept of a double move takes on completely different outlines.
As I stated above I was inspired by Gilman's initial arrangement not his toroidal chess. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the chessboard changes its geometry in space during the game. Therefore, the game is played on a normal rectangular 8×16 board. The game is played according to the rules of Galvin's Doublemove Chess with the AISE's modification, the Italian chess variant organization. In other words, this is a double move w/o any restrictions. I never publish my chess variants without first testing them. On April 9 of this year, the first experimental Double Move Double Chess tournament will be held on the website http://playashshi.ru/. You can take part in the tournament and only then draw your own conclusions about how the gameplay goes in your opinion.
In light of the fact that recently my chess variants have ceased to be published on your site, finding fault with almost every word and every letter in the description of the rules, I act rather instinctively by posting one or another of my chess variants, waiting for your approval. If earlier a publication on your site meant a quality mark for me, now I see the exact opposite. I don't understand the prejudice against myself. My chess variants are implemented in many platforms on the Internet and people enjoy the games. I do not receive any commercial benefits from their implementation, and all my activities as a chess composer and inventor of chess variants are aimed at exploring the limitless chess game in all its manifestations.
I have no illusions about my Double Move Double Chess and Grand Dice Chess and three others on your site. I know you will never publish them. I'm tired gentlemen. Tired of prejudice and stupidity. Do not force me to explain the obvious things in the description of my creations. All texts of my chess variants are posted on the Internet in the form in which I posted them here. And not a single user has had similar questions that I had the honor to observe here in the comments under my unpublished chess variants.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Thank you very much Mr. H.G. Muller! This is a great tool for those who want to understand the game in more detail.