Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I'd have to search around for games.  off the top of my head, i'd also
definitely recommend rococo and ruddigore by aronson.  i also recommend
schizophrenic chess, altho i don't know if we want to overlap this with
the 84 square contest.  i might also suggest my own game crazy38s.  what
else... captain spalding chess by betza.  if we want a 3D game, i'd
suggest millenium 3D by a'gostino or exchequer by hewson, since they can
both be played in about the same amount of time it takes to play a
standard chess game.  i am also a big fan of rennaissance chess by eric
greenwood.  i also like the the commercial game quantum II, III and IV.  i
also like looneybird, even tho freeling is no longer big on it.

sorry this message wasn't as organized as aronson's, nor does it link to
the games.

I did a list of eight, trimmed from a first list of nearly 40, to show how
a set of games might feature a wide range of styles and options.  In
alphabetical order:

Chigorin Chess (Betza)...non-matching forces
Extinction Chess (Schmittberger)...new objective
Magician Chess (Whittle)...small board, new piece, board alteration
Not-particularly-new Chess (Aronson)...add-a-few-squares-and-new-piece(s)
genre
Sudden Death Chess (Chatham)...simple rule change with radical
implications
Take Over Chess (Quintanilla)...small board, different captures, new
piece
Triplets (Sobey)...multi-moves, alternate objective
ximeracak. (Overby)...sweeping piece changes to standard set

I share David's nervousness about larger games, although Modern Chess,
21st Century Chess, and Chess on a Longer Board With a Few Pieces Added
are on my long list.  So are Crazy 38s and Separate Realms (from other
people's lists).

I would like to feature some prizewinners from our contests, and while the
tournament should feature lesser-played designs it might not hurt to have
a better-known game or two in the mix.  Losing Chess is another I'd
consider for that role.

I just checked Peter's linked recommendations, and I shake my head.  There
is so much good stuff there, and elsewhere on CVP, that you cannot track
it all.  :)

I wonder what Ralph Betza, in particular, might suggest?  He's been at
this a while...

I noticed Ben's comment on the 84-space contest.  Aside from the fact that
we won't want many games that size in any case, I don't think that any
game being voted upon in 84-spaces should be eligible for this event. 
Even its presence in a poll to pick the games could affect the contest
voting.

We may miss a good game that way, but if this flies there's always next
year.

There certainly are a lot of worthy games to consider, and this fabulous
website makes it both harder and easier to decide.  Harder because so many
interesting games can be found here.  Easier because you can read their
rules at a click, and in some cases read what others have thought.  I
looked at the games suggested by others, and a few games I am partial to
myself, and came up with this list:

Among newer variants:
  Rococo certainly looks very interesting -- perhaps a better Ultima.
  Separate Realms is new and promising enough to warrant some play.
  Take Over has an interesting mechanic that I'd like to see explored.
  Crazy 38s is so original and innovative that it begs to be played.
  Caissa also has a unique and interesting mechanic and I've always
wondered how well it plays.
  Flip Shogi looks interesting.
  Cannon Shogi looks likes an interesting shogi variant with added power
on the board.

Among large variants:
  Centennial Chess looks fascinating, and for the adventurous, perhaps
even Millenial Chess by the same inventor.
  Some form of Grand Chess seems like a good idea -- I think perhaps
Grander Chess might even be the best choice.
  Reniassance Chess also looks to be a worthy entry in the large variant
category.

Among hexagonal games:
  Hexagonal Chess by Shafran has always struck me as perhaps better than
Glinski's game -- it would be intersting to find out.
  Hex Shogi by Duniho -- perhaps a small board variant is called for, but
that all look intriguing to me

Among established variants:
  Extinction Chess has always struck me as a great, simple idea.
  Chessgi is an acknowledge classic, a great game.
  Rifle Chess has always intrigued me.

And I guess I better stop there, since I've already listed more than 10. I
could easily go on.  I'll resist the temptation to list my only TCVP entry
(Biform Chess) since I've recently had second thoughts about the starting
array.  And it's too bad that this is all happening just a few weeks
before my own new games come out, but I suspect that interest in them will
be a little limited anyway, since they're both big-board variants (10x10
and 11x11) and one of them is very unusual and Ultima-like.

What kind of time frame has been proposed for these games?  A move per
day?  Will there be a time limit?  I'd love to play, but some days I'm so
swamped I can't afford to think about chess.

Time limits are the headache of correspondence chess.  Sigh.  I, too, am
spoiled by Richard's PBEM server.  The Omega Chess tournament there is at
G/180 days (30 days vacation with notice allowed), and that G/180 gets
counted to the minute and second by the central server.

Obviously we don't have that option.

Suggestions for how to best count a G/XX time limit are welcome.  I'd like
to see a year maximum on the games, and expect to see more small variants
than large for that reason (and the fact that we've had a lot of small
variant design contests!).

An absolute time limit of Y days for any individual move, with one warning
and a notice provision for vacations, might also work in lieu of the
above.

I think I like Glenn's idea of X days per move, with one warning before
forfeiture, and suspension upon proper notice of vacation, illness,
personal matters, etc.  Since this tournament should be viewed as a
friendly one between like-minded variant players, the rules shouldn't be
too restrictive.  I think 3 days per player-move should cover most
situations other than the aforementioned major ones, and it means that in
a year all games that take less than 60 full moves will be finished.  In
reality, games even much longer can probably be finished since players
will in most cases not take 3 days for every move.  For some games, and on
some days, I know that I will be able to play several moves if my opponent
is agreeable.

Obviously, the ten games should be Chess with Different Armies, Feeble
Chess, Tripunch Chess, Half Chess, Amontillado Chess, Progressive
Cambiamarce DemiChess, Torus Peacebump Punch Chess, Cloud Chess, All Go
Together Chess, Nemoroth, and Alice's Chessgi.

I tend to pick from games i'm more familiar with....

I'm afraid I don't recognize some of those.  :)

Maybe we have to do a Ralph Betza tournament some time.  Then a Peter
Aronson tournament the following year.  Maybe Parton or Schmittberger or
Freeling the year after that.

These are the salient points, as I see them:

- There are so many good variants it's hard to even agree on a list to
select from.

- Large variants should be carefully considered because of playing time
considerations.

- Subsequent PBEM tournaments could have different themes.

My proposal:

- Select the variants from the top three finishers of the 38, 39, 40, and
41 square contests.  This gives 12 selections to choose from, and most are
not famous or recognized variants.  Their playablility is proven, they are
relatively small, and should generally be done quickly.

I like the idea of holding a different PBEM contest each year, if there is
interest.  Possibilities include a Large Variant theme (selected from the
Large Variant, 100 square, and 84 square contests); a Betza theme (all
Betza variants); an Aronson theme.  The games selected for these contests
should not overlap.  Other possibilities include a history theme
(Shatranj, Xiangqi, Shogi, Makruk, etc.); a Shogi variant theme (Tori,
Chu, Wa, etc.); etc.

Count me in.

I prefer regular-sized or large variants to small ones, so I'd not like to
see the contest limited to games of 38-41 squares, though I'd certainly
not object to some of those games being included.   I'd rather see the
slate of games for any given year be eclectic -- some small, some
normal-sized, some large, and from a variety of inventors or sources.  You
get to experience more interesting games that way, I think, and no one
gets left out because all of the games in a given year are not to his/her
taste.

It looks like I'll be the editor in charge of the first tournament.  Right
now I have compiled, with plenty of suggestions, a list of 42 games to
pick from.  They break down around 50% regular board size, 33% smaller,
16% larger.

I am constructing a poll to allow folks to vote on any of those games they
would like to see in, and indeed to suggest others.  The set of games to
be used _in 2003_ will be picked by the staff here guided by the polls. 
We want a mix of old, new, big, small, etc.  Variety is key the first time
out.

When and if the first tourney succeeds, I'd love to see 'thematics' later,
much as we have held a variety of design contests.  The linchpin issue is
simply whether we can get players.  I'd be happy with 10, but would love
20 or more.  And picking good games is a prerequisite to getting players.

And I agree with the comment that there are so many good games it's hard
to get agreement on a list.  That's why I suggested this; lots of good
games languishing in obscurity.

Please keep the feedback coming...

i see quite a few things have been posted on this subject while i was out
of town this weekend.  i would also caution against too many large
variants for the same reason that they take much longer to play.  in a
previous comment i listed a bunch of larger variants as possibilities, but
i wasn't suggested we play all of them, just that they were all good
possibilities.  i would also be careful about small variants that are
chosen.  as both a game designer and judge, i know that designing a small
chess variant is much more difficult than designing a medium or large one.
 i found very very few small variants that i was truly impressed with, and
even fewer that were so well designed that they would not have been
improved if the ideas had been extended to a larger game.  even some of
the games that ranked high in some of the contests i found to be quite
weak.

Wonderful idea! As far as the timing, either the 3 days per move or the
total day limit idea would work, I think. Total days used could be tracked
manually with each PBEM exchange. As far as a list of games, here's some
ideas:
- Chaturanga (worthy grandad of Chess)
- Jumping Chess (interesting capturing mechanic)
- Glinski's Hexagonal Chess (hex mechanics)
- Makruk (wonderful old and contemporary variant)
- Take Over Chess (I'm partial to it!)
- Chess on a Longer Board (its that Wall)
- Xiangqi (another worthy variant)
- Mulligan Stew Chess (crazy but fun)