Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Rich, I do see the IAGO system as beneficial. After all it does cover almost all types of chess variants. However, I do not think it is a good idea to point all to the direction of 8x8 variants/Seirawan etc. It is best to let the person decide for him/her self what to look into. The problem right now is that the chess variant people are mostly inventors not just play-testers. If there were a sufficient number of players (chess players preferably ) to try out the different variants looking into ones they like the best - we would have something. The pot luck tourney is good esp if it can attract more non-inventors as well . My concern is all this talk about rule changes/draw problem etc is going to turn off the average chess player and thus will not bring new people into playing the variants. And even though 'draw issue/rule changes' are only a small fraction of chess variants - the remaining variants will too be ignored. I prefer a more open method of promotion - many new ideas categorized with no preference for either. A Chess variant could be an alternative game or a proposed rule fix - it is up to the players to decide which they prefer. Personally, I think chess players would be interested in an alternative game not a 'rule fix' that would replace chess. anyway just my thoughts ..)
frozen, I wanted to comment here on what I have said. I am not trying to argue that designers don't play their variants, just am saying that proposed ideas need to be played before a larger audience to see how well they work. Again, more playing by larger numbers, and less merely posting ideas. To this end, I suggest games be broken down to variant elements and people try to 'roll their own'. Maybe in this, the evolutionary path of chess can not be blocked.
Your previous comment seems to assume that all inventors don't play their own variants.
I tried out variants by playing them or at least trying to visualize playing them. Many theoretical novelties are praised on this site (mostly by one person) but are not very playable at all. One can easily distinguish between playable art and non-playable art, though they are some in between.
I tried Omega, Gothic/Capablanca versions/ Seirawan and a host of others. Omega is by far the most playable game.
If anything it is hard for me to determine which is more playable among Omega and some of my games (though I would of course be biased to lean towards mine). But MANY players have also played Omega and compared to Chess and their impressions are far more favorable than for any other variant.
To move away to more open source type games: Birds and Ninjas, Stealth Ninja Chess are a few of my offerings with similar balance and ideas.
It looks like what is needed are high caliber play-testers - players with 2500 + Elo would be very welcome but will they play chess variants?Take a look at this item. Omega Chess already has high caliber play testers.
Case closed.5 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.