Enter Your Reply The Comment You're Replying To Rich Hutnik wrote on Sat, Oct 4, 2008 10:02 PM UTC:My understanding of 'Mad Queen Chess' (also went by Queen's Chess way back when), was they wanted a way to accelerate the game, because they found the game took too long to play. In addition to the Mad Queen and Mad Bishop, castling got added, along with the double pawn move and also en passant. Apparently all these modifications worked as evolutionary additions. They did make he game more complicated, but they did work. An interesting thing, assuming Chaturanga in whatever form was the base of all chess-like games, is that when it went East, the people decided to push the pawns up, rather than give them extra mobility. By doing this, none of all the things we know got into the game. Apparently, the issue for speeding up had to do with the pawns. The west gave them double movement. Well, what can we learn here? Flat out, if a community find something that is 'good enough' a solution, and enough people get interested and use it, it becomes standardized. Look at about anything being adopted, from Microsoft Operating Systems, to the QWERTY keyboard, to http for web pages. They are good enough, and people adopt them and they work. Apparently Chess960 and Bughouse also fit into this to. People see it meets a need, works, and they go with it. That is the history of how technology gets developed. And, this is why I keep speaking of standards. Don't follow this path, and you don't stand much of a chance of having the NextChess happening. That is my take. Please show why it is wrong if you disagree. I am leaning towards the belief that people don't really believe there will be a NextChess that will ever come about, because they don't think they have the resources or means to make it come about. People in this thread have thrown ideas out there, and spoke of some sort of rich and powerful organization able to muscle its will on the world, and end up causing FIDE chess to go extinct. I don't think people believe such will happen, so everyone (everyone being the norm of expectations) is operating from perfect world perspective of a fantasy dreamland, so they get way idealistic and plug in their own personal preferences of what they want. So, on this note, let's say you could have the 'NextChess' appear. This is not a perfect world that it does. There is no powerful organization to muscle itself, but it happens naturally. In light of this, what would you want to see the game accomplish. I am NOT asking for the specific form, but what should it accomplish? What should it do better than FIDE chess. As I see it, I would like to see the following (please suggest your own): 1. An introductory form that is easier to learn than FIDE chess that people could then go to the next level with. Go has this with different sized boards. The rules are simple enough, but the board varies. In Chess like games, having a way to ramp up the complexity is a bonus. 2. A handicapping system that provides novices a shot to compete against advanced players. Go has this. 3. An ability to integrate variants into play, without each variant being seen as entirely different games. Count in this, a way for the game to continue to evolve. NextChess allows you to develop scenarios for it. Throw in mutators into here also. The game is able to handle mutators. If the game Advanced Squad Leader were treated as chess, every scenario for it would be seen as a different game. And if you go hardcore about Chess960 the same way, it would end up being treated as 960 different games. 4. Greatly reduce the chance of the game drawing. At LEAST have a way for a draw to score differently for each side in a meaningful way that reflects play. Also, in this, might as well throw in a more granular scoring system for games. This could also work with handicapping. 5. Ways to prevent the opening book from becoming stale.... and this I mean FOREVER. Ok, if not FOREVER, at least a long time. The game should be robust enough that new solutions can arise without causing the community of players to fragment. 6. Ability to integrate a variety of pieces and new pieces into it. And these pieces can be valued properly. 7. Ability to handle more than 2 players, either as teams or individually (ok, I am on a perfect form here, while I may find this maybe not needed, it would be nice thugh). 8. Handles shuffles, drops, gating and reserves (ok, I am hinting here at a way to keep the opening book fresher). These are features I would like to see from the NextChess, whatever form it takes in specific rules. Please list what you would like to see. I hope this makes sense. And please DON'T say you can't do it. Maybe we don't get all, but wouldn't it be helpful to list what FIDE Chess could do better? Know this, and you then can know what the NextChess could address in its design. Edit Form You may not post a new comment, because ItemID NextChess does not match any item.