[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Ratings & Comments
For those who constantly check the what's new page, I have created the 'Minimal New' page, which just gives a short summary on when the latest comment was made, and when the latest item was added or updated. The address is: http://www.chessvariants.com/index/new.php
No, no, not a smaller font, PLEASE! Some of us use bifocals, and have enough trouble already.
OK, now I'm going to try to clarify ichor: Alabaster Obsidian Wounded Fiend moves Move 1 Ichor deposited Ichor ply 2 Ichor ply 1 Move 2 Ichor ply 3 Ichor ply 4 Move 3 Ichor ply 5 Ichor ply 6 Move 4 Ichor ply 7 Ichor ply 8 Move 5 Ichor ply 9 Ichor ply 10 Obsidian pieces need not move off ichorated square OR Alabaster Obsidian Wounded Fiend moves Move 1 Ichor deposited Ichor ply 1 Move 2 Ichor ply 2 Ichor ply 3 Move 3 Ichor ply 4 Ichor ply 5 Move 4 Ichor ply 6 Ichor ply 7 Move 5 Ichor ply 8 Ichor ply 9 Move 6 Ichor ply 10 Alabaster pieces need not move off ichorated square Does this look right?
Note that the moving Wounded Fiend in the prior comment could belong to either player if it was forced to flee by a Go Away.
Gee, now I wonder where he could have gotten the idea for this game, huh? Well, you know what they say, 'immitation is the sincerest form of flattery' so I guess I should be honored, eh? To anyone who is not overly familiar with this web site I suggest you scroll down on this comments page and click on the link for Double Chess below or find it in the alphabetical index (the one with my name next to it). Anyone can create a variant on a 16 by 8 board but it's not going to have the same 'feel' of regular chess like my variant Doublechess does. I have always felt that games with two kings are flawed. Chess should be single-minded. Checkmate one king, period!
Quoth the Betza: 'The Leaf Pile cannot move of its own accord onto an ichorous square, nor onto a square containing a statue, nor onto a square containing a single mummy but no other pieces. It can move onto a non-ichorous non-Ghast square which contains a mummy and at least one other piece.' Does that mean that a Leaf Pile can move of its own accord onto a square containing TWO mummies? That's my interpretation. (NOTE: Two mummies can be on the same square by pushing one onto another)
He probably got the idea from all the 'Double Chess' variants that have popped up in the past 100 years. Basically, though, few of the double-wide 'real' chess games play like chess for club-strength (Class C and Up) chessplayers. Standard Knights play a reduced role on larger boards (for example, 7 moves to move between end files) and standard Bishops also lose some of their lateral value. Adding power pieces is one way to compensate (whether 3 Qs, RN, BN, whatever) but that tends to reduce minor pieces to sacrificial fodder. Fans of more subtle play are likely to be disappointed. I actually like the 'mate two Kings' idea in Sirotkin's game somewhat better, as it compensates somewhat for the stronger forces and reigns in the value of the initiative a bit (sacs that may win one K must be balanced against a material disadvantage in pursing the other).
Ultima Variants. See <a href="http://www.chessvariants.com/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=243">Peter Aronson's comment</a>.
<br>Ultimate Ultima. See <a href="http://www.chessvariants.com/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=237">Gnohmon's comment</a>.
More comments may be found in the
<a href='http://www.chessvariants.com/index/listcomments.php?subjectid=YellowJournalism'>YellowJournalism</a> discussion.
This game is really something! To me the best large variant of chess! WHY is it not a recongnized variant yet???? :-)
What's a bit surprising is that compelled moves are also 'of its own accord'
Will there be a Half Board version of this game coming out soon? (I just like the thought of a Half Double Chess.) :-)
I got to say, the new format looks great. Also this website continuously amazes me in its depth and breath, and is an endless inspiration to me on my ideas concerning many topics. And has given me new perspective on many things.
1) Spread the shuffled deck FACE UP so that players can see in advance which players will get to move on all future turns. As you approach the 52 move, reshuffle the used cards and spread them again. 2) Each card tells you which player will move first in a pair of moves -- so that if the first 4 cards are 2S, 2C, 2H, 3S -- the move order would be BWBWWBBW. No one ever gets more than 2 consecutive moves.
Tony, what you say about the added or diminished relative scopes of the knights and bishops in double-board variants is true, just as it is in larger variants to begin with (the knight is an extremely weak piece in 10 by 10 variants) but the beauty of a game like my Doublechess variant which I invented is that the knights still have their roles to play. Like I said before, pieces on each half of the board tend to engage each other at the same rate they do in regular chess. Pawns challenge each other, knights move up to the third (or sixth rank, for black) rank to attack enemy pawns, files open up for rooks and queens, diagonals open up for bishops and queens. I think one point that needs to be made here is that in Full Double Chess, stronger pieces are used, and that's fine, if you are a player who likes new fangled pieces that can do neat little tricks and jump through hoops. My Doublechess is more traditional, uses only orthodox pieces and has the look and feel of traditional regular chess. So whether a game like my Doublechess or the new Full Double Chess appeals to someone is going to be a matter of personal taste, I guess. p.s. I would still like to encourage people to add comments below to my Doublechess variant, for which I began a discussion.
Interesting game. The wide board creates both tactical and strategic
situations that are 'regional'. The doubled King adds a certain element
of interest. The strong pieces promote tactics. However, they do not
overwhelm the game because the large board still allows for strategic
maneuvers.
<p>
I'm sure interesting sub-variants could be created with different setups
or different mix of pieces. One possible issue, though, is that the overall
evolution of the game may move more quickly than players are able to
develop their pieces, thus leading to a certain amount of attrition-type
of play, more tactics and less strategy. But I am not sure that this
overwhelms the game. It seems playable.
Regarding some of the debate about faerie pieces versus traditional
pieces, I personally tend to design games with traditional pieces because usually I am more interested in the game system than the pieces themselves.
However, I have played many variants with interesting faerie pieces. The movement of the pieces is an appealing element in itself. In this game they work quite well. And, actually, the mix here is not all that exotic--
as variants go. Check-out Mulligan-Stew Chess
<a href="../42.dir/mulligan-stew.html">Mulligan Stew Chess</a> for an
example of faerie pieces gone a-muck, but in a very playable and
interesting game--with double Kings, by the way!
To flee means that the piece must end its move geometrically further away from the Ghast than it was when it started its move; for example, if your Ghast is on b3, you can move your Human from b2 to c2 because the geometrical distance between the two pieces has increased. Clarification has been made.
'compelled move of its own accord' -- yes, because the owner chooses which compelled piece is to be moved, and if the piece has more than one legal move the owner gets to choose its destination.
Does that mean that a Leaf Pile can move of its own accord onto a square containing TWO mummies? That's my interpretation. (NOTE: Two mummies can be on the same square by pushing one onto another) Yes, it means that. I'm not sure if it was right. As I think of it, it seems to me that this rule was generated in a momentary panic when I myself misread the rules and pearef that a leaf pile could not recapture (it can recapture because when a Leaf Pile engulfs things, there is nothing on the square but the Leaf Pile itself; the Mummy is not generated until the Leaf Pile moves on. Now that I think of it, it seems to me that this adds too many rules and clarifications for too little benefit. If the presence of a Mummy or a statue makes a crowded square safe from voluntary engulfment, doesn't this actually add to the interest of the game? Pending your responses, I believe I will change this back to the original, where, as you may recall, it was stated that the only way to mummify a petrified Basilisk was tu push a Leaf Pile onto it.
I had thought that evaporation of ichor could be treated as a saving move, but if it takes that much explanantion and clarification, it's not worth allowing it. Change not made yet pending your opinions.
I've played it and I agree with Ralph--the best way to introduce randomness into Chess. A checkmate rule I find satisfactory: If a player is mated by a single move, the game is over. If a player is mated by two consecutive moves, if taking two consecutive moves would relieve the mate, the mated player wins the next toss automatically and can play two moves. For stalemate the rule is the same.
Perhaps Tutti Frutti Chess could be considered a Half Board version of Double Chess, because it uses all possible combinations of the basic pieces on an 8x8 board. However, Double Chess has the interesting thought of having two Kings, which seems to be an excellent inspiration for making sense of such a wide board.
Two topics remain:
<p>Ichor -
There is no problem with your ichor rules. The problem resided in my head. You should leave them as they are. (I was starting the ply count the half-turn after the Wounded Fiend moved.)
<p>Leaf Piles -
If you get into the head of a Leaf Pile, as described, there are only two different rules that make sense:
<p>1) A Leaf Pile cannot voluntarily move onto any square that contains at least one mummy or statue, period.
<p>2) A Leaf Pile can voluntarily move onto to a square that contains any number of mummies and statues, if and only if there is at least one other mobile piece to engulf.
<p>I haven't played the game yet, so I don't know which to recommend.
Definitely an amusing game! I particularly like the Minister (RLF), as it's a piece, while obvious in design, I haven't seen before. I find myself wondering about its value. On an 8x8 board, I would be fairly confident in assigning it a value greater than a Queen -- about a Raven (RNN) in fact. But on an 11x11 board, the shorter range components of its movement are worth less, and so a Queen -- which is all long range elements after all -- gains in relative power.
<p>Anyone out there have an opinion?
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.