Comments by RobertoLavieri

This is a very, very nice game, I don´t know how would be the game play and dynamics in a bigger board, but it may be even better in someones, worst in others, depending on board size. It is a good project to think about a bigger board version of Take Over Chess, it has merits enough to try.

I am not clear about original rules for detonators movement. I have seen (a little and selective set of) players playing this game, and detonators are moved as FIDE Knights, but the rules I have read are not uniform, the official Detonator movement description is still a question to me...

The Rating 'excellent' is for Antoine, once in a while I can hear brilliant observations, I haven`t tested the game with Guards that don´t freeze, but my intuition says to me that this idea is really interesting to be considered. My decision of select the Mage as the piece immune to Immobilizer was because the different and long movement of Mage (Gryphon movement), making the work of the immobilizer less effective many moves. One of the problems with ULTIMA is the overpower of immobilizer, many times a game of ULTIMA is almost-blocked by the effect of immobilizers, because the lot of pawns in the game are a strong defense against the other pieces, unable to attack the injuring immobilizer. But the dynamics of a game of MAXIMA with immune GUARDS would be really interesting. Actually, Guards are surprisingly strong in this game when they act in conjunction with other pieces, the effect is that the game tendence is to be more open, due the danger of action of Guards in closed positions. If they are immune to immobilizers, the effect should be higher. Guards are dangerous in the ends when they survive, if a Guard acts at least in conjunction with Coordinator, a Chameleon or a Mage, because the danger of construction of a checkmate net against the enemy King, a King that is not in fact easy to be put in checkmate!. Thanks for the suggestion, it is not other random idea, it is a very good idea to be considered.(a variant?). I`ll test it for MAXIMA v1.4...

When can I submmit the first problems?. (i'm not going to send all of them together, perhaps I have one or a couple of interesting problems at this moment, no more)

John, I don`t like that I can take my own King, it is an error on the ZRF, but if you don´t take your own King, no problem. In the next version I´ll revise the code, and correct this fact. (I think I have to revise other games where there are cannibal pieces, too)

The list of games is very attractive, I think it is not easy to decide preferences. I expect that other designers are going to be animated, and the list grows with good games.

I wrote the last comment. Antoine, have you tried this game without the hole in the middle of the board?. (It is not Bilateral Chess, I mean Jacks and Witches without the killed squares)

Jared, Michael: I expect the final version to evaluate it, no rating until I see the modified game, but my first impression is favorable to the changes. I tested Ryu Shogi, I like the game but some of the observations are acerted and good ones. Jared: Don't try the game on a bigger board, the average number of moves to finish a well played game is actually around 150-180, if the size is incremented, this number is going up, very probably. Good luck.

I'm going to rate the game in a couple of weeks, after extensive testing. By the moment, an 'excellent' to Larry for the nice ZRF.

It was an error!. I'm commenting Ryu Shogi!

Jared, Michael: See the comment in 'Omnigon Photos' (??). It was an error!.

Glenn, I have two problems more for the contest, but I am going to revise it (Games: Dragonfly (subjective degree of difficulty of the problem: 6/10), Achernar (degree of difficulty: 4/10)). Let's see if can improve the quality of these problems. You must have my first problem (game: Maxima, a problem in two parts, one easy, the other difficult). I'm thinking a problem with one of your games I think very adequated to problem construction: Beautiful Sun. Let's see...

My first impresions are the same pointed out by Michael Nelson. Diagonal Bypasser is one of the most inutile pieces I have seen in a game, here due to size dimensions. The best strategy is to split the tower in eight non-royal kings, making the game very dense and complex. The other pieces have limited action, due the power of splited towers. This game should be more playable on a 12x12 board, perhaps limiting the allowed high of a splited tower, say three, although it must be tested.

Well, not so bad, but it still needs improvements. The game is heavy, dense. Tower is a very powerful 'set', it dominates the game strategy, if you play well, the tower is the center of the game. Diagonal bypassers are now more active pieces, but the playability of the entire game should be better on a bigger board. Promotions happens more frequently in the own side of the board. Strategy with splitted tower is not trivial, because the cube. Observation: I´m not an expert, obviously, but Zillions plays this game poorly. Here a problem: It seems to be imposible to win a well played game with King, Diagonal Bypasser and Eagle against the lonely enemy King, isn´t it?. Can you always win with King, D.Bypasser and two Eagles against the solitaire Enemy King?. Try.

In this game you can quickly note the absence of some common characteristics to good chess variants: Say BEAUTY and ART in the game play. Many ENDS are usually horrible!, without real fight, and the game decided in straightforward manner in only a few movements...

Section 2 is coming soon. I need some aclarations about playing rules. Have I to send the moves to the section, to the Editor-Coordinator, or directly to the other player? (interchanging ZSG's is an usual manner if there is a ZRF for the game, but not the only way...).

I am enjoying watching the game as spectator. I think I am not a good player of ALICE CHESS, but it is not really important, the game is nice!. And PBEM system is a great idea. Congratulations, Fergus.