Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Another variant, instead of making the Withdrawer immune to the Immobilizer, you may specify that you want to capture the Immobilizer with an immobilized piece, and the Immobilizer's owner specifies how this will be done, and in this case only the immobilization is ignored. You said Immobilizer seem too powerful, this is another way to make it weak, and in some cases may add some additional complications to the strategy (especially if there are multiple captures possible in this way).
Add a full-rim border to 64 squares and you get 100-square 10x10. In turn, 64 squares come from 36 squares surrounded and 36 from 16 of the 4x4 smallest useful board. Well, here's a 2x2: http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSdavesexamplega. The brilliance of Rococo is precisely the *Border Square*. The border squares make Rococo's play like a large Chess yet requiring the master precision most decimal Chesses lack. Now piece/Pawn can move off a border space, but not onto one except in capturing. For design analysis a decade ago, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=5613, border squares were counted as 0.5 making Rococo as if 82 squares, right on the cusp of regular/to/large categories. Withdrawer can capture ending on a border square only from the 28 squares comprising the 8x8 perimeter, and border squares are more important the Withdrawer than LL, as Abbott implication mis-leads, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=5123. Abbott and Betza, for that matter Dawson and Parton -- unable to imagine let alone cope with the ensuing chaos brought about by 80, 84, 90 and 100 -- were unapologetic adherents to strict 64 squares, outsized and outmoded. Breaking the rule, Cannon Pawn gets established as 2.0 points above, instead of orthodox 1.0 to Pawn of every other design analysis, to keep comfortable, familiar values Advancer and Long Leaper. Important to Cannon Pawn, Border Square secures its value as 2.0, piece-comparable. For instance, Rococo Pawn captures there where Long Leaper cannot unless already in the perimeter.
Cannon pawns are hoppers, not locusts. They capture by displacement. They would not be hindered in ANY way by the absence of border squares.
Replacing the spare long leaper with a 2 range archer seems a logical step forward. Merging the advancer and withdrawer takes a weak piece off the board, but the new piece is possibly too strong in an already offensive game. I like the idea of keeping the withdrawer, but allowing it to capture king and officer pieces from up to 2 squares away, but perhaps only 1 square still for pawns.
Robert Abbotts idea for 2 cooperating triangulators would work better if one of the pieces was made "royal", and the other piece could be brought back, either as a circe piece, or brought into the game by its "royal" counterpart, which is the piece that would have to be captured in order to take both off the board permanently. This idea could be used for other tandem pieces, which are an interesting concept by themselves, and throw up all kinds of new possibilities...
Thanks Antoine. Unfortunately I deleted accidentally the game in which was the position object of discussion, so we have no more any base to follow commenting the issue. However, by means of the "MOVE pieces by yourself" resource, I'll try to reproduce a similar situation.
In 1), both moves are legal, so Game Courier accepts them, just like it would accept h2-h3;h3-h4;h4-h5. But the second part of 2) isn't legal as a single move either.
Thanks Peter. I will follow your statement as the right viewpoint in this issue. However I wonder why the preset's program did not prohibit that double capture if it has reinforced the rules. I made these two moves to test the preset: 1) C h5-f7;f7-h7 by capturing two pawns (f7 and h7) 2) C h5-f7;f7-h9 trying to capture the g8-advancer after capturing the f7-pawn The preset's program allowed the first and banned the second. Perhaps Antoine Fourrière may have something to say since he was who reinforced the rules.
The first capture, C hf-f7, is legal. However, pieces in Rococo don't get to make multiple capturing moves like in Checkers/Draughts, so the second capture, f7-f9, is not legal. Rococo Chameleons can make multiple captures with a single move (when the move fulfills the requirements of multiple attacked pieces capturing moves), but not multiple moves.
On turn 7 in a game I'm playing with Yeinzon I made a double capture with the chameleon which he estimates it is illegal while I don't think so.
Could you please tell us your viewpoint?
Thanks beforehand!
Also, a player unable to move or who causes three time repetition loses as well.Yeah, the Immobilizer is awfully powerful. I am beginning to think that the variant where the Withdrawer is immune to immobilization may be the way to go.
Rococo is win by capture and implied is necessary inability to move as loss, that ought to be added in perfect rules write-up. For example, down to King versus King and Immobilizer loses for the White King usually before the capture. Both Mike Nelson and I find Immobilizer the strongest p-t, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=5219 and http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=5128. (Mine was immediate response to Robert Abbott who invented the sister cv 50 years ago this fall, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=5123.) In the way-out universe of cvs Immobilizer has the single highest value among all quite strong piece-types, yet I. can capture nobody. Immobilizer never really delivers the mate only ultimately assists.
The rules are well written but just need to be updated for clarifications from the 97 comments over the years. Here are several Rococo puzzles without stress on board positions as in mates-in-three: (1) Can a piece ever legally move from border corner to border corner, X00 to Z0 or X0 to Z00? What piece or pieces under what circumstance(s)? (2) What is the maximum number of pieces that may be captured on one move? (3) Is there any piece that may never move horizontally or vertically along border squares? (4) What is the theoretical minimum number of moves for a Rococo Pawn to promote? (5) Describe the quickest possible Rococo Fool's Mate.*** ***[Fool's Mate is just problemists' Helpmates from the start of the game. Helpmates were popularized by T.R. Dawson in the 1930s. This would be a good exercise for anyone who has not yet read every rules-set write-up. Namely -- expanding on that theme -- as you read them all, for each of the 4500 CVs of the Chess Variant Page: (a) figure its genuine Fool's-Mate equivalent, and please determine (b) does any of the 4500 CVs require a Fool's Mate of greater than 8 moves? Or 10 moves? Some CVs actually take quite a few, but so many as 10? Hint: think short-range-piece CVs.]
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.