Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I think you need to do a game simulation to see if it's still possible to checkmate the enemy King with these rules.

For me, it just looks like a never ending game with lots of pieces. 

Queens without the conquer rule has been played many times on Game Courier and has always come to checkmate or one side has resigned. Queens with the conquer rule will be no different.

As I explained in the page, the interactive diagram is only partially compatible with the conquer rule, the AI breaks off after a number of moves due to repetitions. Perhaps the problem can be solved at some point. Then it will be possible to simulate the game throughout.

Are you sure that your game 'SPQR' will come to an end with 72 pieces? That looks more like an endless game to me.

In my game "SPQR" pieces don't change colour so many times. We are talking about different things here. It's not the number of pieces but the rules that can make a game never ending.

How do you come to that conclusion if you've never played the game?

It's just a matter of maths. With lots of pieces changing colours no action will ever be done. That's why I suggested to do a simulation. You don't have to be upset because of that. I just tried to help.

The site is ready for review.

The Chess Variant Pages is a site. You mean to say this page is ready for review.

Queens without the conquer rule has been played many times on Game Courier and has always come to checkmate or one side has resigned. Queens with the conquer rule will be no different.

You'd be surprised at how much a simple rules change can affect a game. Take Annan Shogi. It adds only one new rule - that if the moving pieces has a friendly piece directly behind it, it moves as that piece instead of itself. This doesn't sound like much, but it changes the game so much that the setup is changed and other rules are relaxed or tweaked to account for it.

While the conquer mechanism is interesting, the perpetual capture problem definitely holds it back a lot in terms of playability. The reason normal Queens works is because the pieces get removed from the game after being captured. Because this is not the case in the conquer version, and the flipped pieces is on the origin square, it is very easy for pieces that move alike to perpetually capture one another, making the conquer mechanism very drawish as it is now.

This mechanism might work with piece rosters with a lot of forward bias (e.g. Shogi), but this idea is untested.

I think this problem can be solved by reducing the number of pieces that can, upon capturing an enemy piece, change its colour.

I would say that, on this board size, one or two such pieces per player should be enough. 

While the conquer mechanism is interesting, the perpetual capture problem definitely holds it back a lot in terms of playability. 

Playability is only superficially restricted. The rules clearly state that constant repetitions are excluded. The extent to which players follow this rule or not cannot determine whether a variant is published or not. Incidentally, the current games on Game Courier show that players follow the rules to avoid repetition and that playability is a given.

…it is very easy for pieces that move alike to perpetually capture one another, making the conquer mechanism very drawish as it is now.

In my opinion, it should be left to the players to judge whether the game is interesting or uninteresting. In any case, you can find players on Game Courier who are interested in the game. Furthermore, my game 'Nasty Neighbours (conquer style)' has recently been released. Why should 'Queens (conquer style)' be judged by different standards?

This mechanism might work with piece rosters with a lot of forward bias (e.g. Shogi), but this idea is untested.

May I ask whether passing a test is a criterion for publication? And which test would that be? The games I have played and those on Game Courier show that playability is a given - and that could be considered a passing 'test'. Furthermore, variants are published on CVP that neither have an interactive diagram nor can be played on Game Courier. This again raises the question of different standards.

If the interactive diagram cannot cope with the conquer rule, then this is not due to the rule, but to the AI or the script. It would be nice if the problem could be solved, because then the variant could also be tested against the AI.

P.S.: H.G. has just posted that he has made a change to the diagram that should prevent crashes in conquest versions (see here) - thanks for that.

Okay, so maybe I was a bit harsh on the conquer rule, and in hindsight lost sight of my review process...what can I say, human beings are strange sometimes.

Overall, the page looks good.

Thank you, respect for your comment.

The author, Gerd Degens, has updated this page.