[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Ratings & Comments
The Game of Nemoroth. For the sake of your sanity, do not read this variant! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Moussambani wrote on Wed, Apr 17, 2002 04:38 PM UTC:What's a bit surprising is that compelled moves are also 'of its own accord'
Full Double Chess. 32 pieces each, including all combinations of the basic Chess pieces, on a 16x8 square board. (16x8, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Anonymous wrote on Wed, Apr 17, 2002 08:33 PM UTC:Will there be a Half Board version of this game coming out soon? (I just like the thought of a Half Double Chess.) :-)
Card Chess. Cards determine which player makes a move. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Anonymous wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 12:47 AM UTC: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.
Full Double Chess. 32 pieces each, including all combinations of the basic Chess pieces, on a 16x8 square board. (16x8, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]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!
The Game of Nemoroth. For the sake of your sanity, do not read this variant! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 10:17 AM UTC: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.
gnohmon wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 10:24 AM UTC:'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.
gnohmon wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 10:44 AM UTC: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.
gnohmon wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 10:47 AM UTC: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.
The Fair First Move Rule in Chess. Every turn you flip a coin to see who goes first.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Mike Nelson wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 02:10 PM UTC:Good ★★★★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.
Full Double Chess. 32 pieces each, including all combinations of the basic Chess pieces, on a 16x8 square board. (16x8, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on Thu, Apr 18, 2002 05:09 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★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.
The Game of Nemoroth. For the sake of your sanity, do not read this variant! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]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.
Spinal Tap Chess. Variant on an 11x11 board with a once-a-game mass 'Battle Move' of Pawns and Crabs. (11x11, Cells: 121) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]PBA wrote on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 12:00 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★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?
gnohmon wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 07:00 AM UTC:In several web pages, I have written down, step by tedious step, the appropriate numerical methods for estimating the values of the Q and the (1,3) and the F and the R on any size board.
<p>You can answer your own question by doing the appropriate calculations, step by tedious step.
<p>I once wrote a C program to do it, but it's a real pain to generalize it to whatever possible movement pattern on whatever size board.
<p>(Source code long lost, sorry.)
Anonymous wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 08:00 AM UTC:The basic problem with doing the calculations, is that at heart, I'm lazy. I was hoping to scare an answer out of the woodwork, produced by some more energetic person.
<p>In any case, I'm fairly sure that even on an 11x11 board, a Minister is at least as valuable as a Queen, which makes Spinal Tap Chess' restriction on Queen promotion but not Minister promotion inconsistant.
gnohmon wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 09:00 AM UTC:The calculations are indeed of a nature that inspires laziness.
<p>Once in a while, one must.
gnohmon wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 10:00 AM UTC:After I wrote my last note I saw a page than thanked me for providing feebback on this page.
<p>Would Feebback Chess be a game where the pieces have normal strength advancing but are feeble in retreat?
JCL wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 11:00 AM UTC:I would think that Feebback Chess is a wager game you might play with your physician or attorney where you might win the fee back.
Way of the Knight. Pieces with experience levels: a `role playing variant'.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 12:00 AM UTC:I am ever so happy to hear that somebody has played and enjoyed the game. Of course, it is not my greatest artistic achievement, but it is one of the earliest examples of what sort of variants can be designed with different armies, and of how the theory of piece values can help the designer of a chess variant.
My own experience with different armies is that it's a lot more fun. One player believes that his R is worth more than the other player's NW, the other player believes the NW is actually better, and both fight to prove their ideas are better.
<p>Your odds-giving idea is excellent. I had some discussions of odds-giving onmy scs pages, but those are long since lost; perhaps I should revisit the idea.
<p>If you have played Go, you will appreciate how much a comprehensive system of odds-giving can add to a game, and you will appreciate that Chess (including chess variants) would be much better if there were a generally accepted system for it.
<p>Unfortunately, the value of an extra Pawn (for example) depends on the average strength of the two opponents, and therefore it is probably not possible to have a comprehensive system at this time.
<p>Instead, you have used the progressive-odds system, which is self-adjusting and which has always been known to be well-suited to a long series of games between the same two opponents -- a perfect choice.
<p>Continue to enjoy!
Rutherford's 1-dimensional Shogi. Modern one-dimensional chess variant, based upon Shogi. (1x17, Cells: 17) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]PBA wrote on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 12:00 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★This is a cool idea. Someone ought to write a Zillions of Games rules file for this game. (I might one at some point, but I'm getting a bit backed up.) Having Zillions play itself at 3 minutes a turn on a fast machine might expose any forced wins.
Augmented Chess. Players give standard chess pieces small additional movement possibilities from predescribed set. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]PBA wrote on Thu, Aug 2, 2001 12:00 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★This is very nice, but I find myself wondering about the army
selection process. I can see several possibilities:
<ul>
<li>
Each player writes down their section secretly, and the selections
are simultaneously revealed;
</li>
<li>
White makes their selections, announces them to black, then black
selects;
</li>
<li>
White makes one of their choices, then black chooses a piece, then
white, etc. until both players have chosen their Queen, Rook, Bishop
and Knight;
</li>
<li>
White selects their Queen, then black selects a Queen,
then white selects their Rook, then black selects a Rook,
then white selects their Bishop, then black selects a Bishop,
then white selects their Knight, then black selects a Knight;
</li>
<li>
Like about, but in order Knight, Bishop, Rook, Queen.
</li>
</ul>
Clearly all of the above would work reasonably well, but is there a
prefered way to select the armies?
PBA wrote on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 12:00 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★I recently finished a PBeM game of this variant with Tony Quintanilla
(which I won't post due to embarassing turn 18 mate by a RNA
supported by a BD <g>), and found this a very exciting game.
<p>
As we all know, a Pawn is only as strong as the hand that holds it,
and Tony usually beats me at games that fairly closely resemble usual
Chess. But I found this game particularly interesting as I was sure
I had picked a stronger team than his:
<blockquote>
<DL>
<DT><B>White (PBA)</B></DT>
<DD><B>Queen</B>: RfbNFA</DD>
<DD><B>Rook</B>: RfbN</DD>
<DD><B>Bishop</B>: BW</DD>
<DD><B>Knight</B>: NF</DD>
</DL>
<p>
<DL>
<DT><B>Black (TQ)</B></DT>
<DD><B>Queen</B>: RNA</DD>
<DD><B>Rook</B>: RF</DD>
<DD><B>Bishop</B>: BD</DD>
<DD><B>Knight</B>: NW</DD>
</DL>
</blockquote>
Now Tony's Knight is color-changing, and his Bishop is color-bound,
but with all of that power on the board, it didn't seem to matter.
I suspose if the game had lasted longer and we had gotten down to
fewer pieces, it might. As it was, it felt like playing in a
minefield (which, IMHO opinion, is a <u>good</u> thing).
Crown
. Players secretly decide whether their king or queen (who moves like the king) is royal.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Excellent piece of detective work and extrapolation!
The Game of Nemoroth. For the sake of your sanity, do not read this variant! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on Fri, Apr 19, 2002 03:04 PM UTC:Excellent feedback. 'No problem with ichor rules' -- then I won't change. '1) A Leaf Pile cannot voluntarily move onto any square that contains at least one mummy or statue, period.' This was the original rule and I think it may be better to revert to it. '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.' This is what I really wanted to change it to, but I hurried and messed it up. However, I think it makes for a faster and more exciting game if the mummy/statue confers temporary immunity (but very double-edged because the mobile piece is compelled to move off). Leaf piles have no heads, so you can't get into its head. However, you have comprehended its primordial nature.
Mideast chess. Variant on 10 by 10 board, inspired by ancient Tamerlane chess. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I do like this game, although the Cavalier is a very 'irregular piece'. I propose to replace it's movement by the one of the Croocked Bishop! This would produce a very enjoyable game, don't you agree? :-)) The other pieces, I believe, are well balanced for 10x10 board, and the fact that Knights depart from the 2nd row turns them more valuable in the opening and during the rest of the game (a problem with other 10x10 board variants that place them on the 1st row!). Please comment me on this to: nuno_cruz78@hotmail.com
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.