Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Modern Shatranj. A bridge between modern chess and the historic game of Shatranj. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Anonymous wrote on Fri, Jan 18, 2008 05:19 PM UTC:
This statement by Mr. Duke does not seem logical: Quote:

'Modern Shatranj' is worse than Shatranj anyway because of damage to Knight by powerful Elephant. [end quote]

If the statement is true, then it would follow that Chess, Xianqi, and Shogi are all lesser games than Shatranj... why? Because the knights have less relative value than they do in Shatranj. The Duke premise is that a weeker knight factor makes a game worse. Let us look at Fide Chess... We have Bishops and a Queen - these make the Knights even weeker than do Joyce's Elephants. But who would argue that Chess is worse than Modern Shatranj, which in turn is worse than Shatranj?

On another note, Joyces' Modern Shatranj made it into CV Tournament 3. How could this happen if it were a bad game? It had to be voted on. It obviously got enough votes. It is true that there are some similar games that already existed. But that does not make MS a bad game.

I also believe the idea of making a Short Range Alice Chess has much merit.

Keep up the great work Mr. Joyce. You are a very good game designer in my opinion. You recent critic's comments don't hold up to a logical review.