Check out Grant Acedrex, our featured variant for April, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Reverse Order Earlier
Fergana. (Updated!) The clash of empires on Fergana Valley. (Cells: 168) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Sat, Mar 16 04:33 AM UTC in reply to A. M. DeWitt from 01:11 AM:

Of course. I just updated the rules. 


🔔Notification on Sat, Mar 16 04:32 AM UTC:

The author, Florin Lupusoru, has updated this page.


A. M. DeWitt wrote on Sat, Mar 16 01:11 AM UTC in reply to Florin Lupusoru from Tue Mar 12 03:41 PM:

Is the double/triple move of the back row of Pawns also subject to en passant capture?


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Tue, Mar 12 03:41 PM UTC:

I hope the updated rules have answered all the points from the comments. 


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Tue, Mar 12 09:25 AM UTC in reply to Diceroller is Fire from Mon Mar 11 07:34 PM:

Looks pretty innovative.

Thanks. I am glad you like this game. 


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Mon, Mar 11 07:34 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

Looks pretty innovative.


Bob Greenwade wrote on Mon, Mar 11 05:58 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 03:56 PM:

I am not so sure, if the defender tries to avoid trading Pawns as much as possible, but instead pushes these forward when they get under attack. It only requires two interlocked Pawn chains of opposit color to make an impenetrable barrier.

I don't claim to have anywhere near your experience and expertise, but I find it hard to imagine that a player could build an "impenetrable barrier" of Pawns, especially when that wall of Pawns is being met by an attacking wall of Pawns. I'd think it quite hard to stop an opponent from either capturing or passing a Pawn. I'd have to see your evaluation demonstrated.


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Mon, Mar 11 05:33 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 03:56 PM:

I'd think that the other player's Pawns could whittle that down pretty effectively

I am not so sure, if the defender tries to avoid trading Pawns as much as possible, but instead pushes these forward when they get under attack. It only requires two interlocked Pawn chains of opposit color to make an impenetrable barrier.

Both players also have lots of Knights that can jump over and break that barrier. 


H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Mar 11 03:56 PM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from 03:31 PM:

I'd think that the other player's Pawns could whittle that down pretty effectively

I am not so sure, if the defender tries to avoid trading Pawns as much as possible, but instead pushes these forward when they get under attack. It only requires two interlocked Pawn chains of opposit color to make an impenetrable barrier.


Bob Greenwade wrote on Mon, Mar 11 03:31 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 02:37 PM:

It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to beat a player that is bent on a draw, and builds a double wall of Pawns to hide behind.

I'd think that the other player's Pawns could whittle that down pretty effectively, even without Florin's proposed rule. It could take a while, but they're not Iron Pawns.


Bob Greenwade wrote on Mon, Mar 11 03:27 PM UTC in reply to Florin Lupusoru from 03:18 PM:

How do Mongolian Pawns move? 

Same as Standard Pawns, but with a three-step initial move instead of two (since Hiashatar is played on a 10x10 board).


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Mon, Mar 11 03:18 PM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from 02:24 PM:

How do Mongolian Pawns move? 


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Mon, Mar 11 03:14 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 02:37 PM:

It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to beat a player that is bent on a draw, and builds a double wall of Pawns to hide behind.

This could be prevented by not allowing Pawns from the back row to move unless the Pawn on the same column has moved. 


H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Mar 11 02:37 PM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from 02:24 PM:

It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to beat a player that is bent on a draw, and builds a double wall of Pawns to hide behind.


Bob Greenwade wrote on Mon, Mar 11 02:24 PM UTC:

This is a very interesting rule for the second-wave Pawns (Rows 3 & 14). I've been trying to think of how they'd behave in an Interactive Diagram; I think the easiest way would be to treat them as Mongolian Pawns that automatically morph into standard Pawns at Row 6/11. I'm just not sure whether they'd get the double move from there (unless the imnfD was replaced with iimnfD).


💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Mon, Mar 11 01:09 PM UTC:

I am pleased to introduce yet another game with simple rules and a complicated strategy. 

This page should be ready. 


16 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.