[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by Antoine Fourrière
Polypiece Chess. Each time a piece moves, all pieces of that type on both sides change their move. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I believe it would be very useful for Immobilizers when they are mixed with Orthochess pieces. A Queen/Immobilizer or an ImmobilizerW/ImmobilizerF (with ImmobilizerW paralyzing enemy pieces which are adjacent by a side and ImmobilizerF paralyzing enemy pieces which are adjacent by a corner) should lead to a more balanced game. If each side had two such pieces, it would bring an exit for frozen immobilizers. (If each side had only one of them, it would be much easier to free frozen pieces, but that would already be true if only the moving piece changed its path.)
Shogi 
. Optimized ZRFs for Japanese Chess and some recent variants.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating](modified comment)
<BR>I haven't yet studied the ZRF extensively, although it is Excellent if it works, and final-version-will-be-Excellent if it doesn't, but I wish to mention that in my soon-to-be-released Chess on a Larger Board with not-so-few Pieces Dropped - a 12x8 version with the later drop of supernumerary baroque pieces which do not find their place in the starting setup -, I use such macros as
<BR>(define 1000-points (
<BR> (verify (not-in-zone? full-zone))
<BR> add add add add add add
<BR>))
<BR>where full-zone is the game board and the squares carrying the pieces to be dropped, but <I>not</I> some extra bogus squares, such as
White-Throne, WhiteKingMoved or OFF, which carry no actual piece.
<BR>The (1000-points)s or (10000-points)s are embedded in a low-priority (bogus-moves) move-type which enables Zillions to discard them at once
while adding their value to the piece values.
<BR>Otherwise, Zillions would value my Can(n)on - a flip piece - more than a Queen, or a Halfling-Withdrawer just like a Halfling-Advancer.
<BR>(The drop of a piece also creates a bogus piece Mark, which incites Zillions to drop the pieces when it has nothing better to do.)
<BR>I wrote two hours ago that extra piece types change the value enhancement brought by such macros, because before I introduced my latest piece, (1000-points) required ten adds in lieu of the current six, and Zillions valued the Orthochess Pawn at 6000 points as opposed to the current 8000, but now I believe that the main reason is that I suppressed some extra bogus squares. Anyway, not-on-board? instead of (not-in-zone? full-zone) doesn't work.
(verify (not-in-zone? full-zone)) always discards <I>any</I> bogus move, whether there is a move priority or not.
<BR>I have just asked Zillions to search the same position for one minute, with and without the line
<BR>(move-priority normal-move bogus-move)
<BR>and I got nearly the same depth:
<BR>8/277000 with the move-priority and 8/268000 without the move-priority.
<BR>So the move-priority doesn't seem very useful, after all.
Pocket Polypiece Chess 43. Game with off-board pocket where all pieces of a type change when one piece of a type is moved normally. (7x6, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I wrote that the Windmill 'revolves around one of its eight neighbors'. I meant that the Windmill revolves around one piece of either color on one of the eight neighbor squares, not that the Windmill revolves around a neighbor square even when that square is empty.
To Nicholas Kuschinski: Thanks for your comment. 1)I agree that checkmate seldom happens early. 2)A piece on the Pocket is somewhat grounded, and I do not feel that it is such good tactics to hog the Pocket. Indeed, when I tried to give Black first use of the Pocket in exchange for White's opening move, it didn't seem to help. However, if you should prove right, I would switch to Cube Pocket Polypiece Chess, which gives a player the right to re-enter the Pocket only when his opponent has done so, but with the extra rule that a player may also enter the Pocket indefinitely once his opponent has no polypiece left (or perhaps once he has managed to send his King on the last rank, which is a useful trick to remove whatever bothers the endgame). The Pocket is certainly necessary to give mate with several combinations.
Outer Space Chess. Space-themed game with hyperspace and regular space boards. (2x(5x8), Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Oddly, my comment on your game quite matches yours on mine. There is a lot of imaginative stuff. Otherwise, I wouldn't have spent the day to devise an incomplete zrf to implement your rules. But I'm afraid that White has an extraordinary advantage, as suggests: 1. Galaxy 2c - 2b = Galaxy2 1... Planet 1d8 - 1e6; Galaxy2 on 2a 2. StarCluster 1c3 - 1c4; Galaxy3 on 2b 2... Planet 1e6 - 1d4; Galaxy3 on 2a 3. Spaceship 1c2 - 1c3; Galaxy4 on 2b 3... Planet 1d4 - 1e6; Galaxy4 on 2a 4. Galaxy4 2b - 1d6 = Galaxy 4... Galaxy4 2a - 2b = Galaxy5 (forced) 5. Galaxy 1d6 - 1e7 5... Galaxy5 2b - 1d3 = Galaxy (forced again) 6. Galaxy 1e7 - 1d8 6... Nebula 1c8 x 1b8 7. Galaxy 1d8 - 1c8 7... Nebula 1b8 x 1a8 (regardless of the twice-in-a-row limitation) 8. Galaxy 1c8 - 1b8# Well, it should be OK if you limit the five-turn rule to pieces which enter the Hyperspace, but having said that, I can understand why a player would send a Galaxy or at least a Spaceship on 2b, but I wonder why he should bury them on 2a or 2c.
Pocket Polypiece Chess 43. Game with off-board pocket where all pieces of a type change when one piece of a type is moved normally. (7x6, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]To Michael Nelson: Thanks for your comments. 1)I agree that the Pawn pocketing variant is poor, not only in regard to the Pocket hogging issue, which I feel is a double-edged sword when the hog is a Bishop/Rook, Knight/Alibaba or Falcon/Windmill, but because Pawn promotion becomes too easy. 2)Indeed, I may be wrong, and Nicholas seems to concur with you, but I feel that keeping the Pocket for twenty turns forces you to play with an inferior army for an awful lot of time. (When I used 'grounded' in my reply to his comment, I only meant 'inactive'.) 3)The time-limit variant looks nevertheless interesting, but I prefer my modified Cube version. 4)As for 'A piece in the Pocket is affected by flipping, but a move to or from the Pocket doesn't cause flipping', this leads to synchronicity when the pocketed piece is back, which I don't like too much. 5)But maybe 'A piece in the Pocket is affected by flipping, a move to the Pocket flips only the other pieces and a move from the Pocket doesn't flip anything' would be best of all, because it would give asynchronicity to the pocketed piece, and in the same time would give a fighting chance to fend off the threat of a pocketed piece and to recapture the Pocket by sending there a piece of the same family (although you can already send a threatened officer into the Pocket).
Rook Mania. Game where all pieces have different sorts of Rook-like moves. (7x7, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The game is certainly interesting - I welcome in particular the Basilisk and the Coordinator -, but it may need refinement with the help of Zillions, which is not good at evaluating capture modes, however. (Zillions also believes a Pao to be worth a Rook, when XiangQi masters think it is worth only half a Rook, though on a less crowded board.) I believe you're right to limit the custodian capture to a pair of Pawns. Robert Abbott has long complained that the Pincer Pawns are too strong in Ultima, whose armies are certainly stronger than they are in Orthochess or in your game. Still, if the capturing force of one Pincer Pawn amounts to nothing, the capturing force of two Pincer Pawns is also less than threatening, and the players would decline to capture the last pair of Pincer Pawns. Robert Abbott also wanted to use a pair of rookwise-moving Coordinators, which would capture by coordination with each other. Why not decide that the Pawns are Pincer Pawns until they are reduced to three units, Coordinators - working with each other - when they are reduced to exactly two units, and something else, maybe uncapturable and uncapturing - but probably not unimmobilizable - Rook, or Withdrawing Rook, when there is only one left?
Pocket Polypiece Chess 43. Game with off-board pocket where all pieces of a type change when one piece of a type is moved normally. (7x6, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Michael, Your set of rules provides a nice variant, say three-strike pocket polypiece chess, but I don't find anything wrong with a win for King + 3 Officers vs. King + 2 ill-placed Windmills, or even King + Rook + Pocket Knight vs. King + 2 ill-placed Windmills. When they were Falcons, I should have catered for that problem.
Outer Space Chess. Space-themed game with hyperspace and regular space boards. (2x(5x8), Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If my understanding of your rules and my implementation of them in a Zillions file is correct -- anyway, it prevents Nebulae from crossing controlled squares, including the squares which are controlled by the other Nebula, but I haven't been able to take into account that same limitation for that other Nebula, to limit the Nebula-controlled-square limitation -- I reach the following conclusions: 1)The Nebula is the least mobile piece. Indeed, I have never seen a Nebula move more than one square: there is always a friendly piece which prevents the Nebula from crossing anything. Without a pack of friendly pieces, the Nebula would be immediately captured. 2)The Galaxy is quite mobile. It is also very useful in protecting a diagonal against a Spaceship. Maybe slightly too useful. 3)2a and 2c never attract a Galaxy or Spaceship, and 2b, hardly ever. Your new rule doesn't prevent a Galaxy or Spaceship to hog the hyperspace on 2b, but it doesn't seem to matter. The Galaxy and Spaceship are simply too valuable in the regular space. 4)It seems a Planet is not significantly stronger than a Star Cluster. 5)Your game is playable as it is, and even enjoyable, which is not so easy when there is rifle capture, but only in the regular space. Maybe your black hole on 2b should be replaced by a gigantic black hole in 2a-2b-2c, which could only be entered on 2a and exited on 2c or the reverse, or maybe Galaxies should be able to send a neighbor -- any neighbor or just a Galaxy or Spaceship? -- on 2a or 2c to the price of going themselves on 2b, or maybe some eleventh piece should be added to each army, I don't know, these are just ideas that I throw out, I haven't really thought about it.
1)'Nebulae are permitted to land ON squares controlled by other pieces, just not move THROUGH them'. That is what I understood when I playtested your game. Since all the neighbor squares of a Nebula are controlled by friendly pieces, it follows that the Nebula moves every other time as a Wazir. (If they weren't controlled, the Galaxy would soon capture the Nebula.) 2)I indeed tried to copy the British Chess macro. But since the Nebula is immune from capture, (verify (and empty? not-attacked? not-defended?)) doesn't work, and I had to write a verify for each square on the Nebula's path, with the enemy Nebula controlling the squares as a Rook. 3)Zillions often loses by playing 1.. Star Cluster 1c5. For instance: 1. Galaxy 2c - 2b = Galaxy2 1... StarCluster 1c6 - 1c5 ; Galaxy2 on 2a 2. Planet 1d1 - 1e3; Galaxy3 on 2b 2... Planet 1b8 - 1c6; Galaxy3 on 2a 3. Galaxy3 2b - 1d6 = Galaxy; Galaxy on 1d6 3... Planet 1d8 - 1e6 4. Planet 1e3 - 1d5 4... Galaxy 2a - 2b 5. Planet 1d5 x 1c7 and a slow win for White.
Growing and Shrinking: Playing with the Size of Chess Pieces. Playing with the Size of Chess Pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]My incoming variant, Chess on a Larger Board with not-so-few pieces dropped, tries to graft on my favorite 12x8 pattern a variety of rather different pieces, like David Howe did in Chess on a Longer Board with a few Pieces Added, which features the Wall.
My two-square piece is a Golem (nothing to do with Golem Chess). When another of my pieces, the Wizard, is taken by a Pawn, the Pawn and the Wizard form a two-square diagonal piece, whose both parts, which must remain connected, move first on the symmetrical square on the same rank, which need not be empty, and then one square diagonally. (Thus the Golem's path is both side-changing and color-changing.)
A Golem has up to nine moves. For instance, a Golem on c2 and b3 (the files are indexed from y to j because the starting array on the eight central files is duplicated from Orthochess) may move as:
c2 to g3, and b3 to f2, f4, h2 or h4
c2 to g1, and b3 to f2 or h2
c2 to h3, and b3 to f2 or f4
c2 to h1, and b3 to f2.
The Golem captures by replacement, and is captured when either of its parts is captured. (Which comes fast, because it is created anywhere on the board, and is not as well guarded as the Wall, but otherwise the owner of the Wizard wouldn't allow the formation of an enemy Golem.)
Of course, the Golem could have been devised to move first on the symmetrical square on the same rank, and then one square orthogonally. There would still be nine moves, and the Golem's path would be colorbound. (Actually, it is nearly colorbound. It has to cross the center files before reaching a square of the opposite color on the same side of the board.)
My two-square piece is a Golem (nothing to do with Golem Chess). When another of my pieces, the Wizard, is taken by a Pawn, the Pawn and the Wizard form a two-square diagonal piece, whose both parts, which must remain connected, move first on the symmetrical square on the same rank, which need not be empty, and then one square diagonally. (Thus the Golem's path is both side-changing and color-changing.)
A Golem has up to nine moves. For instance, a Golem on c2 and b3 (the files are indexed from y to j because the starting array on the eight central files is duplicated from Orthochess) may move as:
c2 to g3, and b3 to f2, f4, h2 or h4
c2 to g1, and b3 to f2 or h2
c2 to h3, and b3 to f2 or f4
c2 to h1, and b3 to f2.
The Golem captures by replacement, and is captured when either of its parts is captured. (Which comes fast, because it is created anywhere on the board, and is not as well guarded as the Wall, but otherwise the owner of the Wizard wouldn't allow the formation of an enemy Golem.)
Of course, the Golem could have been devised to move first on the symmetrical square on the same rank, and then one square orthogonally. There would still be nine moves, and the Golem's path would be colorbound. (Actually, it is nearly colorbound. It has to cross the center files before reaching a square of the opposite color on the same side of the board.)
Chess on a Larger Board with not so few Pieces Dropped. Game with an interesting mix of Orthochess and Exotic pieces, some of which start in-hand. (12x8, Cells: 96) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Oops! The Elephants do not know the meaning of clockwise and contra-clockwise. Sorry about that.
1st World Open Chess Variant PBEM Championship. Tournament proposal open for public comment before creation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I would suggest to draw randomly the games for 'choice 1' among all the recognized variants. (I feel strongly about that.) I would also suggest a draw of six recognized variants. Thus, if Marseillais Chess and Italian Progressive Chess, or Hostage Chess and Chessgi are both recognized and selected, so be it. Besides, I don't believe a player should have to be skilled in only four variants to win the Championship. (But if there are only four variants, maybe once Marseillais [Chessgi] is drawn, Italian Progressive Chess [Hostage Chess] cannot be drawn.)
'No player may use a machine for active assistance in analysis.' Does this mean we cannot use Zillions at all, or simply that we may not have Zillions search the better move, but are allowed to enter all moves manually for both sides, and if so, only the moves effectively played to see the current situation, or also the moves we intend to play or believe our opponent will play, as we would with a physical chessboard in correspondence play (but then, Zillions could tell us that a move we wrongly foresee would be illegal, unless we write a zrf which would allow each piece to go anywhere on the board and has no winning condition)?
Chessopoly. Board with a hole in the middle where pawns move clockwise. (12x12, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If the setup were symmetrical, Black would have a sure draw available. But logically, Black should choose who gets the outer royalty. It seems better to have one's Knights closer to the enemy King, and one's Bishops not hampered by the inner frontier. (Upgrade my rating to Excellent if it isn't.)
Contest to design a chess variant on 43 squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I have just cast mine too. Maybe Glenn could write on July 1st to any candidate whose vote is missing, instead of disqualifying him immediately?
PromoChess. Everything but the king can power up. Mix of Japanese/Western/fairy pieces. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]9x9 fits both Knight and Camel, and the promotion rule is a nice way to allow Marshals and Januses (Jani?) without having to start with blockbuster armies. (I like the Janus more than the Marshal, so if that idea had occured to me, I would have decided promoted Rook = Rook + Bishop = Queen promoted Bishop = Bishop + Knight = Janus promoted Knight = Knight + Camel = Wildebeest promoted Camel = Camel + Silver = augmented Omega Wizard well... promoted Pawn = Gold, and promoted Silver = Silver + promoted Pawn = Commoner) It seems this game will find a bracket before I enter the PBEM design and play!
Maxima. Maxima is an interesting and exiting variant of Ultima, with new elements that make Maxima more clear and dynamic. (Cells: 76) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]LOTS of excellent ideas, the equine King, its cylindric ability, fewer Pincer Pawns, the second way to win, and a piece which is immune to Immobilization. But why should that piece be the Mage, and not the less powerful Guard?
Panal: a hexagonal chess. A double-royal piece variant on a 61-hex board. (Cells: 61) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I suspect the Gunne's shooting variation renders the game unplayable. (Rifle capture is like red pepper, it tastes good, but there should be very little of it. It sent my first game, Bilateral Chess, way off balance.) I would suggest to allow rifle capture by the Gunne only when it is adjacent to its own King, for instance.
Invent-and-Play: Opponents Wanted. Members-Only The list of designers (and their games!) who want to participate.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Take Over Chess. Jump across pieces to take them over from your opponent. (7x7, Cells: 41) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I haven't tested the game, and am a bit afraid that the two-way capture makes the pieces too powerful. But the game looks promising, to say the least. So I give it a rating of Excellent as it is, or, if need be, with some twisted rule which decides at any time whether the piece captures by replacement or by jumping, or with your suggested rule that capture by jumping is possible on an adjacent piece. (I believe you're right to pit the 64-square version for PBEM.)
Invent-and-Play: Opponents Wanted. Members-Only The list of designers (and their games!) who want to participate.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Jacks and Witches 84. Variant on 84 squares with special pieces and special squares. (12x8, Cells: 84) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Thanks for the comments, Roberto. (I may not be able to respond to later comments before next month, but they are welcome.) No, I hadn't your idea, because when two Witches stick together, the resolution is coming quick, and that clumsy hole in the board lowers the risk of a somewhat infortunate early decision. (Maybe I should have ruled that both Witches remain immobilized until the end, once they enter in contact.) Certainly, on a 96-square board, or preferably 108-square board, I would give each side two Witches. On an unrelated matter, I did't want to use full Murray Lions, but maybe I should allow them a two-square capturing jump when the prey is the Witch. When Witches are involved, the Knight is stronger than the Lion. (The tampered evaluation of my ZRF doesn't take this fact into account.)
Omega chess . Commercial chess variant on board with 104 squares.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I am in the same situation. I also can't play alf-Grand Chess, alf-courier... This seems connected to the fact that when I try to open the boards with Paint under Windows XP, I get only a black image. I haven't had the same problem with later(?) boards, e.g. for Chess on a Longer Board with a few pieces added. Regarding Glinski, it concerns only the hex6x6gs.bmp file. (I could open the Francis Monkman courier2 file from courier1.zip with Paint and tweak it to get a 12x8 board for Jacks and Witches.)
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.