Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 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 ]

Ratings & Comments

EarliestEarlier Reverse Order LaterLatest
Discussions[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
David Howe wrote on Sat, Apr 6, 2002 03:26 PM UTC:
Ok guys, I've created a minimal discussion system. Feel free to start using it (and breaking it). I still have more work to do, but it's basically functional. Please do let me know if you have any particular requests or criticisms (or kudos :)...

Xiangqi FAQ. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
David Howe wrote on Sat, Apr 6, 2002 03:48 PM UTC:
I just visted <a href='http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=rec.games.chinese-chess'>rec.games.chinese-chess</a> on dejanews.com and it appears as if the FAQ hasn't been updated in some years. If anyone knows where we can get an up-to-date (or more up-to-date) FAQ document, please contact us. Thanks.

Discussions[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Peter Aronson wrote on Sat, Apr 6, 2002 06:54 PM UTC:
Great idea David -- thanks!

King with a Shotgun. Twice each game, the King can make a non-moving Rook capture. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Adam Norberg wrote on Sat, Apr 6, 2002 08:21 PM UTC:
Just as a note from the author: Ed's variant of doing queen attacks does
work well, also. But don't get too trigger-happy- it's good defense. Make
sure you don't get blindsided by a bishop in the classic variant!

The major downside to the queen shot variant is that then you can't
reasonably use a bishop to move in for the kill; you pretty much have to
lose two pieces to the shotgun, unless you use knights well...

-- Adam Norberg (sgamer [att] swbell [dott] net )

Worse than Worthless. A discussion of pieces with negative value, and the Nattering Nabobs of Negativity![All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Anonymous wrote on Sat, Apr 6, 2002 10:01 PM UTC:Good ★★★★
I'd like to see this article expanded to include other types of ...er..
cursed pieces and cursed players.

For example, how about Restless (or Hyperactive or Flying Dutchman)
pieces that have to be moved each turn (e.g., the King in Triplets)?

Or how about the Ruddigore Chess curse that requires a player to
capture an enemy or discard a friend at each turn?  (By the way, a similar
curse is imposed on the players of Sudden Death Chess.)

Perhaps you could also include Hesistant (or Hamlet?) pieces that
require two or more turns to move (somewhat like Ralph Betza's
Inchworms).

Finally, how about Cuckoo pieces that can only capture friendly 
pieces? (Some species of cuckoo place their eggs in nests of birds of 
other species.)

Space Chess. Three dimensional commercial chess variant. (3x(8x8), Cells: 192) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Isaac wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 02:32 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
thank you for the rules for space chess. I too lost the directions to my set years ago. My set was purchased at a game store in 1994as well, looks extactly like the one you have placed on the web, but the box it came in says 1981 Pacific Game Company,INC. no. 1420

Discussions[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
John Lawson wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 04:25 AM UTC:
I know I'm just being a pest, but maybe the default number of comments that are on the new comments page should be rather less than 100. It loads really fast, but if there are 100 long comments, it could take a while for us poor benighted souls who live too far out in the boondocks to have DSL, and don't wish to pay our cable companies triple per month. If they were just 'Excellent, great job!' it would be OK, but when some of those wordy people start writing, and talking about things that aren't even chess variants, well.....

Chess History and Reminiscences. Project Gutenberg eBook version of this public domain book (large!).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
gnohmon wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 04:57 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
More than excellent, superb!

Harry Bird is one of history's greatest non-GM chessplayers. His
originality combined with his longevity (he played against Morphy, and he
played against Lasker, maybe even against Vidmar, if I remember rightly)
combined with his strength (not a world champion, but surely stronger than
me) make him one of the more interesting personalities in modern chess
history.

I have often heard of this book, but was never fortunate enough to find a
copy. Now I can read it at last.

More than superb, optimal!

gnohmon wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 05:08 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
Bird lost a match to Steinitz by a mrer 7 to 6. 

'Bird is one of history's greatest non-GM chessplayers.' I said, but I was
wrong.

Steinitz was a tough cookie. Losing 7-6 makes Bird a GM in my estimation.

More than superb, optimal!

gnohmon wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 11:29 AM UTC:Good ★★★★
The book itself is very disorganized and tough to read, with many passages
that are repetitive and uninteresting.

However, enough of Bird's personality shines through that I am glad to have
made his acquaintance.

To correct what I said earlier about the time of his career -- it was from
before the first tournament up to the times of Lasker.

David Howe wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 01:11 PM UTC:
Project Gutenberg also has Edward Lasker's 'Chess and Checkers: The Way to Mastership'. Here's a link to it. If enough folks want this on our site as a web page, I'll create it. Otherwise, here's the link to it on PG's web site: <a href='http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext04/lchch10.txt'>Chess and Checkers: The Way to Mastership</a> (text file).

Discussions[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
David Howe wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 04:39 PM UTC:
Good point John -- I have changed the default to 25. Now the question is, should the default be summary mode or detail mode??

John Lawson wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 05:17 PM UTC:
Detail mode.  This is how I use the comments:

   I arrive at the What's New page via bookmark.

   If there is a new topic of interest, I investigate, and comment if
inspired.

   If the 'last comment' time is more recent than the last time I logged
on, I review the recent comments. 

A minimal visit is two clicks (What's New, recent comments).  Usually I
visit at least every other day.  If the comments were in summary, I would
have to expand each one to see what it's about.  

By way of explanation, I attempt to reduce the amount of typing and mousing
I do to a minimum.  Many of my older, professional IT colleagues have
become diabled due to repetitive motion injuries.  I have many years left
to work, and I spend 8 hours a day in front of my workstation earning a
living, then come home and play with my personal computer.  I would like to
be able to enjoy my computer in retirement without wrist braces and voice
response.

Chatter Chess. Variant based on the idea of line chatter where rider pieces can switch to other friendly pieces' lines of movement. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Peter Aronson wrote on Sun, Apr 7, 2002 11:18 PM UTC:
I think I was a little unclear about my idea. A stepping piece would move on a chatter line if one of the squares that it could move to was on that chatter line. Thus, a player with a King on <b>a3</b>, and a Bishop on <b>a1</b>, with the Bishop having a clear move to <b>h8</b> could move the King all the way to <b>h8</b>. Which is why it could be hard to run down the King without disposing of the Bishop first. <p> But in any case, your suggestion to exclude the King and Pawns from this behavior is probably wise, leaving it for various Faerie and CDA pieces in their stepping moves.

Chain of Fools. Game with a Chess set where the goal is form chains of defended pieces. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
gnohmon wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 01:55 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
This appears to be an excellent game, with a lot of thought and effort.

Is it a chess variant? Not really, even though it uses chess pieces. It's a
mathematical (topology) abstract game, and you might find many fans for it
in rec.games.abstract -- give it a try!

Many abstract mathematical games become popular and widely played, but the
market for them is not 'chess variant' people. 

I haven't tried Chain of Fools, but if it's as good as it looks you'd be
doing yourself a big favor by taking the game over to rec.games.abstract,
where you can find folks who will really appreciate it.

Discussions[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
gnohmon wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 02:03 AM UTC:
I agree with John Lawson.

Chess History and Reminiscences. Project Gutenberg eBook version of this public domain book (large!).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
gnohmon wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 02:04 AM UTC:
chessvariants could have a page with links to all known downloadable chess books...

Contest to design a chess variant on a board with 42 squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Glenn Overby II wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 02:47 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
It's amazing what range can be found among these entries, unified only by
one simple requirement and the ethereal concept of 'chess'.  This was fun!

Wildebeest Chess. Variant on an 10 by 11 board with extra jumping pieces. (11x10, Cells: 110) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Glenn Overby II wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 02:54 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
I recently sent in a nomination to make this game--a well-established, widely-disseminated, thoroughly-played design--a 'recognized' variant. If you agree, send the editors an email. :)

Tron Chess. Every square passed by the queen creates a wall that hinders movement. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Adam Norberg wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 03:38 PM UTC:
Author's note: I'd like to see this in Zillions.
--Adam Norberg

Overprotection Chess. If an attacked piece is more often defended than it is attacked, it gains extra powers. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Peter Aronson wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 07:37 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
This looks like fun! I particularly like that once you overprotect a Pawn by two (easy enough -- just take an unattacked Pawn and give it two supporters), suddenly it captures forward and to the side. <p> I find myself wondering if overprotection is calculated recursively. That is, when determining overprotection, is overprotection taken into account? <p> Consider the following: <blockquote> White Pawns at <b>a3</b>, <b>b4</b> and <b>c3</b>; <p> Black Pawns at <b>a6</b>, <b>b5</b> and <b>c6</b>. </blockquote> Assume white's move. Can the white Pawn on <b>b4</b> capture the black Pawn on <b>b5</b>? If you apply white's Wazir capture first, then it can (since it is overprotected by two, black not having a Wazir capture as it is only overprotected by one), if you apply black's Wazir capture first, it can not (since then the white Pawn will only be overprotected by one). Curious, no?

Chess eBooks[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
David Howe wrote on Mon, Apr 8, 2002 08:49 PM UTC:
I'm considering adding a section to the Chess Variant Pages for chess eBooks. Right now I'm aware of only two: Chess History and Reminiscences by H.E. Bird, and Edward Lasker's Chess and Checkers: The Way to Mastership. Both are Project Gutenberg files. Does anyone know of any other online chess eBooks?

Overprotection Chess. If an attacked piece is more often defended than it is attacked, it gains extra powers. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
gnohmon wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 01:55 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
A Pawn or piece must be attacked in order to be overprotected. I said that,
right?

'and dynamic' ... 'where checkmating the opponent could also checkmate
you!' means that the enemy K is defended several times (but of course not
attacked) so that when you attack the enemy K it becomes overprotected and
gives check to your nearby King. I could have made that clearer, right? But
you're correct, even the closest reading of this doesn't really say whether
it's recursive. Yes, why not recursive, gosh darn it and gosh darn it
again?

If you could overprotect an unattacked piece, this would 'merely' be a new
(and perhaps an excellent) form of Relay Chess.

So, should add a line that the powers gained by an overprotected piece can
be used to overprotect another piece.

Should add a line 'therefore you can destroy your opponent's overprotection
by moving your attacker away'.

And should add the explanation of how giving check[mate] can check[mate]
yourself.

Better now?

Tron Chess. Every square passed by the queen creates a wall that hinders movement. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
gnohmon wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 02:00 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
When Nemoroth finally appears, you will be amazed by the piece called the
Wounded Fiend, and the distant resemblance to the Tron Queen.

There must be something in the air that makes people come up with similar
ideas at nearly the same time.

Overprotection Chess. If an attacked piece is more often defended than it is attacked, it gains extra powers. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Peter Aronson wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 03:41 PM UTC:
Busy editorial beavers have made the requested edits to this page, all the while whistling the 'Happy Editor' song. <p> Ok, I read the part about having to be attacked to be overprotected, but somehow it didn't sink in. But there's still a lovely paradox here. <p> Consider: <blockquote> White has Pawns on <b>a3</b>, <b>b4</b> and <b>c3</b>, and a Rook on <b>b1</b>. <p> Black has Pawns on <b>a6</b>, <b>b5</b> and <b>c6</b>, a Rook on <b>b8</b>, and a Bishop on <b>d6</b>. </blockquote> The white Pawn on <b>b4</b> is attacked by one piece, and defended by three, so it can move and capture as a Wazir. Which means it attacks the black Pawn on <b>b5</b>. The black Pawn is then attacked by one, and defended by three, so <em>it</em> can now move and capture like a Wazir. But this reduces the white Pawn on <b>b4</b> from being overprotected by two to being overprotected by one, which means it can no longer capture the black Pawn at <b>b5</b>. But if it can not capture the black Pawn at <b>b5</b>, the black Pawn isn't attacked, and so can't capture the white Pawn which suddenly overprotected by two, which means it <em>can</em> capture the black Pawn. But it can't . . .

The Game of Nemoroth. For the sake of your sanity, do not read this variant! (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
David Howe wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 03:45 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
I've heard vague rumours that this game, or a game very much like it, is
still played at Miskatonic University...

The excellent rating applies to presentation and originality. I have not
playtested this game (yet). Truth be told, I'm not sure I *want* to! :)

Slanted Escalator Chess. Chess on an asymmetric board with interesting connectivity. (8x8, Cells: 60) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Peter Aronson wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 04:05 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
This is something new in a way, or at least something not often done. It is a game where the two sides, while having the same movement, have different board topologies to deal with in the opening and midgame, and I think it an interesting idea. Now, if there was just some way to determine if it was balanced . . .

27 comments displayed

EarliestEarlier Reverse Order LaterLatest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.