[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
When I go to sleep at night, I often try to think about something
interesting or pleasant while I drift off. Last night I found myself
thinking about an odd Chess piece.
<p>
The piece moves without capturing like a Dabbabah-Rider (repeated leaps
of two squares in the same orthogonal direction), but captures like a
Rook. So, mDDcWW or mDDcR in Ralph's funny notation.
<p>
And I found myself wondering: how powerful is this piece, and what sort
of game or problem would it be good for? I has a number of curious
characteristics: except for capturing, it is doubly colorbound, being
restricted to 1/4 of the board; and while it can switch by capturing,
at any time it can only attack 1/2 of the board.
<p>
It seems to me that this piece is vaguely cannon-like, being more powerful
in the opening and midgame than the endgame. It also seems to me that it
might be a very charming part of a piece mix. Any thoughts?
Mike Nelson wrote on Tue, Jul 30, 2002 09:55 PM UTC:It seems like a most interesting piece indeed. Such a piece could be the basis for a variant along the lines of Ralph Betza's Colorboundmost Chess. I will post details as a comment to Colorboundmostr Chess.)
Jared wrote on Wed, Jul 31, 2002 07:21 PM UTC:Hmm... very interesting. Did you consider the Bishop/Queen equivalents? Or even (gasp) the Nightrider equivalent (moves as a 2/4 rider or captures as a 1/2 rider)? The latter seems like an especially odd piece, preferably for use on really big boards. And how would a king like this work? Move as an Alf./Dab. and capture like a king, or capture like an Alf/Dab/King? And would a CV in which every piece is like this work well?
I considered the Bishop equivalent, but decided it would likely be
too weak.
<p>
Mike Nelson has proposed a game based on these sorts of pieces -- you
can see it in the comments for Colorboundmost Chess. My suspicion is
that there would not be enough power in the board in the endgame, making
the game drawish.
Mike Nelson wrote on Wed, Jul 31, 2002 10:08 PM UTC:Perhaps this would make it less drawish: The King moves as a Ferz and captures as a King (mFcK) and cannot castle. The former change means less force is needed in the endgame, the latter enhances the chance of a middle game victory.
I think the weakened King might to the trick, though I would express the funny notation as FcW. The resulting game ought certainly to be different!
Anonymous wrote on Thu, Aug 1, 2002 07:27 AM UTC:This odd piece oddly is almost a rook worth in the endgame. It still has the can-mate property, except for the rare case that the bared king is in the secure corner (If the odd piece is on a1, the secure corner is a8). In the most cases it can block the secure corner and the bared king is driven by zugzwang towards a mate. The secure spots left by the odd piece are all single fields without secure neighbours -- thus a bare king must leave them. --J'org Knappen
Jörg, I'm not sure about the can-mate part. It seems to me that in a lot
of situations the piece would result in stalemate, not mate.
<p><hr><p>
Mike, I threw together a crude ZRF of your game last night -- it seems to
play OK. But I was wondering if stalemate ought to be a loss instead of
a draw, as the nature of the game makes it more likely, as does,
unfortunately, changing the King from WF to FcW.
<p>
By the way, do you have a name for it?
Mike Nelson wrote on Thu, Aug 1, 2002 05:25 PM UTC:No, the odd piece does not have the 'can-mate' property. If the odd piece (mDDcR) is on the seventh rank holding the bare enemy K on the eighth while the friendly K moves in, the odd piece can't move to the eighth rank to mate! If the odd piece is on the sixth rank, it can't hold the enemy K on the eighth--the whole seventh rank is safe. Two of the odd pieces, one on a even-numbered rank (or file) and one on an odd-numbered rank (or file) should mate easily.
Mike Nelson wrote on Thu, Aug 1, 2002 05:42 PM UTC:Peter, thank you for the ZRF. I haven't though of a name--fell free to give it any name that appeals to you--the ZRF is much harder work than thinking of the game, plus the whole idea followed logically from your new piece. It think both the stalemate as win and bare king rules as in Shatranj would be good idea for this game, in fact for any game with weak pieces. (Though I've used these rules in games with strong pieces as well.)
Actually, Mike the ZRF was pretty easy -- just a quick modification of the
standard Chess ZRF. I still need to update the piece descriptions.
<p>
Names . . . hmm. Maybe:
<menu>
<p><li>
Quarterbound Chess;
</li><p><li>
Odd Piece Chess;
</li><p><li>
Stuttering Chess;
</li><p><li>
Skipping Chess;
</li><p><li>
Transfering Subsets Chess;
</li><p><li>
Nelson-Aronson Odd Piece Chess;
</li><p><li>
Separate Realms or Separate Realms Chess.
</li></menu><p>
Once we decide, someone ought to put a page together for it.
<p>
If stalemate is a loss, then by Ralph's Rule Zero, so is 3-times
repetition.
<p>
I'm not sure bare King is the best choice for this game. Given that
stalemate is a loss, and the King is fairly weak, I think you'd lose
some interesting endgame play that way.
Mike Nelson wrote on Thu, Aug 1, 2002 07:13 PM UTC:Peter, I think you're right--bare king rule should not apply. There will be some interesting endgames with stalemate as a win. For example, K and R vs K can be a win if the pieces are in the right realms, such as R holds enemy K on the last rank as friendly K moves to stalemate. I rather like the sound of Separate Realms Chess.
Mike Nelson wrote on Thu, Aug 1, 2002 07:29 PM UTC:R on seventh rank and bare enemy K on eight rank IS stalemate! How did I overlook that?
Anonymous wrote on Fri, Aug 2, 2002 07:13 AM UTC:It is not sufficient for the king to be on a secure file or rank, to force a draw against king and oddling it has to be in the secure corner. Here is how to mate the black king with king and oddling: White: Og7,Kh6 Black: Kf8 First, White brings its king to h8, than it pushes its king forward using zugzwang until it reaches d8. White forces the Black king to a8. Now the finale: Kc7! Ka7 Og5 Ka6 Oe5 Ka7 Oa5++ J'org Knappen
Mike Nelson wrote on Fri, Aug 2, 2002 03:15 PM UTC:With the weak King (FcW) and stalemate as a win, the proposed game isn't a bit drawish. K vs K on the same color is a forced win for whichever side can get the opposition. (This is a simple calculation: if the coordinate differences between the Kings are odd, for example a1 vs d6, the player on move wins; if the differences are even, the player not on move wins.) Similarly, if the Kings are on the same color K and any piece vs K is a forced win unless the bare K can capture the piece--the stonger side can use the mobility of the piece to avoid zugzwang.
So, Mike, who's going to do the page? <pre><g></pre>
That's a neat mate, Jörg!
<p>
Does that mean Separate Realms Chess could go back to using a standard
King? I think I like the current King, even if it isn't strictly
necessary, since it carries the theme of the game to completion -- every
piece restricted to some subset of the board when not capturing.
Mike Nelson wrote on Sat, Aug 3, 2002 03:24 PM UTC:Peter, if you are willing to do it I would appreciate it very much. Jorg, neat mate! Possibly Separate Realms Chess is playable with an orthodox king, though I still prefer the weaker king for the game. I wonder if the starting position for the mate can be forced though--I think a defensive stategy for this game will be to keep the king away from the edges to maximize its mobility.
18 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.