Comments by RichardHutnik

Fergus, let me clarify a bit on my 'dead end' comment:
1. Dead end means that the game itself, if merely a creation of a designer
(and held as such) won't have much in the way of modification.
2. For there to be sufficient play to test a game out, and feedback from a
game community on it (and them adjusting accordingly), the game won't
build much of a following behind it.  The community is what gives a game
life, and lends to its promotion and it being 'evangelized' to get other
players.  It take a community to keep a game alive.  They need to feel
ownership over the game, or least be a stakeholder in it.  Chess and other
of the more know abstract strategy games have this.  The smaller variants,
most of which are on here (and not the major ones) don't.

So, what I am saying is there needs to be a community behind a game caring
about its growth, to take off.  And I was suggesting in what I stated that
maybe we can do a crowdsourcing version of chess, to see what may develop.

A possible approach to this is what I mentioned in the NextChess4 thread:

How about having a tournament where the winner then picks what game will be
played the following year, and players compete, and the player returns the
following year to defend their title?  A proviso would be the player can't
pick one of their own designs as the game to defend their title against.  I
believe this format would touch on a lot of what was discussed in this
thread.  Of course, we should look towards refining the concept, and take
it from there.  

A variant on this last point is, rather than it be an annual tournament,
you run an ongoing series of tournaments, and keep playing the same game
until someone different wins.  They then would end up picking a different
game, and is one they didn't design.  I would recommend here that the
winner of the prior tournament doesn't have to play in the qualifier.

Anyhow, I believe you also come up with an agreed to list of games that
would be candidates to be played and can be picked by the winner of the
tournament.

A few comments (I had been out of action trying to get a new laptop set
up):
1. In regards to invention, I believe it is one of the strengths of the
variant community, and provides both an outlet for designers and also a way
for chess variants not to get boring.  My concern with them is that each
one ends up being its own path, and doesn't lend anything to the
collective experience of playing variants, outside of just another game to
play.  I would like the experiences to be able to mingle among one another
and for the variant design, in some framework, to enable one design to be
built off of another, and that to continue to evolve, and what is learned
to be able to be reused.  Yes, we can do that to some extent now, but we
have issues with naming conventions and the like, which make it more
difficult.
1a. I have a vested interest in seeing the chess variant community produce
champions at various games, which we could help use to promote variants.  I
speak from the perspective of a sports federation when I say this.  And I
write this also, in that I would like to see IAGO to be able to recognize
and stand behind the conventions the variant community came up with for the
pieces and the like.
2. Chess on a 12 by 12 board looks like Warmaster Chess 2000.  Please let
me know how it isn't the same.  Here is word on Warmaster:
http://blog.chess.com/RooksBailey/chess-crusade-warmaster-chess-and-no-chess
3. FastChess?  We talking about a Speed/Blitz chess as the game in
question?  I am of the belief also (I say also if Speed/Blitz is what is
meant by FastChess) the chess community is deciding to speed up the clock
to solve all its ills.  And it does resolve a lot of the issues it has,
regarding openings, draws, and making the game more interesting to watch. 
Unless the variant community gets together and comes up with some way to
showcase itself more to the world, and get interest, there is a definite
interest in locking out the variant community, saying it doesn't bring
anything to the table but distraction.  I would rather not see that
happen.
4. I don't believe you will get anything to replace 8x8 unless the
physical boards become more readily available.  That is how it works.  And
I wouldn't expect 9x9 to be it either, as that totally disrupts normal
chess.  It also brings back visions of the chess variant with 2 queens
aside and the bishops on the same colors.

Does the CV site here rate players across a range of chess variants so it
is able to determine who the strongest player is at chess variants in
general?  If so, I am curious how.  I was looking for a way that you could
have an ELO-type system that would factor the strength of a player across
multiple chess variants (or other games), rewarding stronger play over a
range of games, as opposed to someone dedicating to a few.

Any ideas on how to do this, or how the CV site does?

Check out this Internet Meme:
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/roller-coaster-chess

People playing chess on a roller coaster.  It looks like it has been
holding steady since 2007 as far as Internet activity goes.

Hello everyone.

IAGO now has a multi-site leaderboard up that we are still testing and
adding features to.  You can see it here:
http://leaderboard.IAGOWeb.com

We would be up for people visiting the site, and signing up.  I would also
be interested in seeing CV play.chessvariants.org games get on there
sometime, so we can add the results here to.  

Currently a few games in the chess/chess variant family are up: FIDE Chess,
Shogi, Grand Chess, and Shatranj .  I would be up for a lot more.

Anyhow, if interested, please post and say you are.  Also, feel free to
sign up and follow these directions:
http://iagoweb.com/wiki/docs/associations

The way the system works is that a partner site sends an RSS feed out of
the game results.  IAGO picks it up, and compiles the data.  People who
sign up get their game stats and see how they compare against other players
who also sign up (Elo).  

The system allows one rating board for multiple game sites.

Movie about Bobby Fischer in the works.  The current working name for the film is 'Pawn Sacrifice'.  Toby Maguire set to play Booby Fischer.
 
Info here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596345/

I think it would be interesting if more games cominging Tafl with Chess are proposed and played.  I had done this earlier with TaflChess:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MStaflchess

TaflChess is a lot closer to regular chess than this.

On a 10x10 with the Eurasian Pawn, where do you suggest the pawns set up,
on the second or third row?  I personally would like to say EITHER and add
the concept of multiple formations into the NextChess, so that we don't
develop stale opening books, while also not falling into having erratic set
up of shuffle.  I would say also players would be free to set up their
lines of pawns on either the second or third pawn, but restrict things.

Bungie, the makers of Halo, announced today a new multiplayer mode for
Halo: Reach.  That mode is CHESS!

See the video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS7V9SbBvRA

I know, the date and all that, but I think they should throw it in there.

The idea for this game came out of another game mentioned on Scheming Mind.  I thought it would be interesting to change their approach to all Queens, and see how it went.  It apparently went pretty well with my playing it on Zillions.  It ends up being an interesting twist on misere' games.

Yes, it likely can be better.  Feel free to come up with something better.  When I do a game design, part of it is an inspiration for others to improve upon it.  Or, I will stumble across something also I feel is worth looking into.

I would propose adding the Eurasian Pawn in here two.  At least cover the full range of pawns, and note them, as a discussion point.  During play of this variant, ground rules can be added for what is in and out.  For example, I would say NO to a Eurasian pawn on an 8x8 board.  Ok, the Eurasian pawn:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSeurasianpawnpi


One options for pawns is to have one (or a few base) picture of them, and then stick dots or Xs around it to signify how it moves and captures.  I know  a pawnrider would likely both be silly and hard to notate.

As has been noted, this format has gone through revisions.  In the most recent form, which is for Connect Four (Captain's Mistress), it goes under the name 'Massive Multiplayer ________' and you stick the name of the abstract strategy game in there.

Some other tweaks also have been done:
* In play, there isn't scoring, just trying to be on the winning side.
* When it is your team's turn to vote on a move, you vote.
* When it isn't your team's turn, you can choose to defect to the other team. There is an options to limit the number of times you can defect, with the current preferred number of defections to be one.
* If all players defect from one team, they all lose, and the game is over.
* Run digitally, it would be idea to keep players anonymous, so no one knows who is whose team, or even the number of players on their team.

As an added note, this format could be used in scientific research to study loyalty and defection patterns among team members, and you add or remove elements from the environment to see how it impacts the loyalty of players in the game.

I just saw this game on Boardgame Geek.  With there being a deck building
game genre craze going on, that is starting to rival Trading Card Games,
For the Crown makes an appearance.  It looks like chess meets the deck
building game genre.  Might be shaping up to be to the deck building genre,
what Navia was to collectible card games.

Here is more info on it:
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/97512/for-the-crown

I found this article on WhyChess.org , which should be relevant to the
variant community:
http://www.whychess.org/node/324

I had felt that the chess community would benefit, if it took variants more
seriously to deal with the issues it has faced with chess.  Well, it looks
like they are going for the idea of reducing the clock, and the variant
community is getting locked out yet again from being taken seriously.

Anyhow, give some thought here to this.  It would be of benefit if variants
could go more mainstream.