Comments by CharlesDaniel
One more thing though: If the inventor had concentrated only on point 1 - the throne square - we might have something. I think this variant would work discarding points 2 + 3 (make 3 move repetition a draw, stalemate a draw just as in standard chess) . It is illegal to move to throne square if you put yourself in check. It could be interesting because sometimes even a bare king vs king and rook may win! Too bad, this idea was sunk by the *need* to correct an imaginary 'flaw' in chess.
Just a comment on Sam's 31 short-range pieces comment: I noticed he mentioned the lion as worth 2 queens. Perhaps, on a very crowded small space, but I don't see how this can be on a large open board. In my game Asylum Chess, the piece Insane Ninja Knight has the moves of a lion (and double capture too).I say its worth slightly less than a queen in this game on an open board. I don't see any clear description of the lion except in Cho Shogi game (and they are some differences). (In fact, I initially thought that the ninja knight was never seen before in any form!) I have yet to see the Lion used in any other game. Perhaps, it is assumed that a jumping piece should not be too powerful or the gameplay would not be balanced?
Have you thought about this preset: frnbqkbnrfpppppppppp60PPPPPPPPPPFRNBQKBNRF Notice that all the pawns are protected. The 10X10 also is a lot more roomier for the extra pair of pieces.
The scoring changes were tried before - I think Clint 'something' ... suggested 3pt for black win, 2pt for white win, 1pt for black draw and 0 for white draw. There is nothing wrong with the game of chess (orthodox) - its just analyzed to death. If only the top players (GMs) can look through every chess variant and pick the one that they feel keeps the beauty, strategy etc of the original game. A 10x10 with a few new pieces seems best in my opinion .. That would be a chess tournament worth watching.
Chess (orthodox at least) has in my opinion perfected the rules governing the draw. Stalemate been a draw is very important in chess, and yes, Chinese chess it is a win, but I think it is not logical that way. It looks more like the draw outcome was not considered important. The problem in FIDE chess championships/tournaments - short agreed draws. Once that is not allowed - the draws are PERFECTLY acceptable. The only other problem with orthodox chess is the analysis factor - too many games - too much theory. A new game with the SAME rules but 1 or 2 new pieces will be an ideal candidate for 'evolution'. Sure you can play around with eliminating draws, but most chess lovers will take issue and righfully so. Also, the games played today esp. Anand and Kramnik were very exciting. So even at this high level it has a lot of life left.
Yup -.. Regarding chinese chess - Yes, it may very well be logical within that context. It is the idea of Orthodox chess have stalemate=win by comparing to Chinese Chess that's flawed Regarding WC The two Draws: Anand - Kramnik: 1/2 Leko - Gelfand: 1/2 were even more exciting than Morozevich - Svidler: 1-0 These were hard fought draws, not the horrible short agrement draws.
The ninja guard cannot move beyond 2 squares and only move diagonally - I think that is clear. What you are asking should be possible IF there is no empty square between the friendly piece and enemy piece as in diagram described by the line: 'It can capture the pawn on b6 by jumping over the knight at c5.' Are you asking if there is an empty square after the knight on c5 (b6 was empty) if it can capture a piece say on a7? The answer is NO since it can only jump or move 1 or 2 squares diagonally. I will reword the description - there seems to be some confusion with it.
Bland chess? And we wonder why chess players avoid chess variants!
Douglas, Since you did the work for that file and are registered here, why don't you add the link here instead? Let me know if this is possible...
Thanks - I did not see that..The word immediately was wrong in that context and has been removed.
Yes I did think of this compound - it was to be called the Insane Ninja! I used the insane ninja knight because it is present in my game Asylum Chess. I guess it could be fine to have the promotion to Insane Ninja instead of insane ninja knight if agreed by the 2 players I might use the insane ninja in an upcoming variant.
In Airplane Chess, the airplane moves both diagonally and orthogonally. There seems to be no specification or limit to its long reach power - it can jump over pieces in-between to capture the last piece in the line. I got the idea from checkers not from airplane chess. The whole reasoning between my choice for the 'immediate landing' bomber used in Birds and Ninjas rather than the extended landing bomber was that pawns are too vulnerable and easily attacked. It is not clear but I suspected that this *might* increase the number of draws. Airplane Chess will most certainly lead to higher number of draws since pawns are *much* more vulnerable than either version of the flying bomber. The nature of airplane being so difficult to defend against would make game much wilder and very different from Flying Bombers as well. The other mode of the flying bomber is essentially the Dabbabah (from which the cannon might have derived) as noted.
Now, I do see many problems with this game:
It is difficult for one side to recover from a material deficit.
Even capture of a pawn by a piece gives one side a small advantage so it is hard to exchange.
Random Move Number Chess and Power Absorption were the first two variants I ever created.
I found this site later and realized I could submit them.
To my dismay Power Absorption had already been invented so I decided against submitting it.
Incredibly enough, even the name of my game is almost identical to this!
I did, however, go on to create many more variants..)
I certainly proved that all you need is a little bit of idle time and imagination to create variants!
While many variants try to balance the number of leapers with sliders, this game takes a different approach. Every piece is a jumper or a 1 square stepping piece. The Queen is replaced by the General, the rooks with dababbas and bishops with Elephants. Then, the game is expanded to a 10x8 similar to a Capablanca variant. The knight compound added to both dababbas and elephant.
The game starts out slow but gets much more tactical. Orthodox chess players with a preference for knights and for positional play and Indian defenses (moving pawn one step at a time) would love this game. Also the Shatranj reference and ruleset adds novelty to this game.Some interesting points: the dababbas and Minister can mate with aid of king. (A bit tricky with the dababba) (Of course the General can too) . The dababba starts out as a weak piece but gets stronger as the game progresses.
The pieces may have been used before as pointed out, but this should be expected. I used the ninja guard which is very similar to elephant in Birds and NinjasHaving also created a number of large board variants (e.g. see Insane Ninja Chess) and needing to compare them playtesting-wise to orthodox chess, I was forced to play quite a few games and have come to realize that standard chess really does live up to the 'hype' touted by chess lovers.
Chess as a social game to meet new friends may decline but as an exciting battle of wits between two people on the internet - quite clearly increasing in popularity.
Regarding the luck attribute - the chess analogy also shows up in poker commentary when two players are trying to outwit each other are in commentator's words 'playing a chess match'.
I doubt if anyone cares if computer plays chess better than them (except perhaps some top level GMs). Cars can travel faster than runners too, - do we see a decline in marathon/running sports?
Interesting Luck /gambling motif in chess : No Limit Bet Chess
I uncheck the box Exclude Pieces not in Setup so that the pieces that need to be dropped can be added, but they never show up. So right now there is no way to play this preset because you cannot drop the pieces in.
You can see for yourself by editing the preset.
Is there someone who can help on this or has any advice?
Thanks Joe, but for some reason it does not work for me - I tried it with saving first. I don't know what I am doing wrong - I know it used to work even on update before.
Quite interesting! I have to disagree - it is not much like std chess (play-wise at least)- the game is substantially altered because of those pieces. Am I right in understanding the mace this way: I move my mace next to enemy pieces. Then on same turn I can take them off the board? Also, is it compulsory to remove all pieces attacked by mace? And if mace removes piece/pawn that exposes king to check then does that not mean that the opponent can then capture your king? I was wondering too what do you think of adding one mace and one Horse-apult to my customizable game : pick piece big chess. I think it will be a bit slower than yours but it might be quite interesting. If you dont mind - I can add that into the presets for my game.
It might play a bit differently from your game, but who knows it might be interesting.
One thing I was wondering can I just not bother capture the enemy piece and just move my mace away?
Gary, I just reworded the description for the preset. But my suggestion was the other way around - a war-mace and alfil-Horse-apults. Though I see no reason for it to be the other way around either.. And thanks for your comment, I hope that players realize they have a lot of flexibility in choosing the game they wish to play.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.