Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
I'd tentatively estimate the relative values of the pieces in Eurasian Chess to be:
P=1; V=2; B=3; N=3.5; C=3.5; R=5.5; Q=9.5, with a K's fighting value guessed to be about = 5 (noting it cannot be traded). A K's fighting value would be much lower in my estimate, but for its ability to restrict the enemy K's movements (especially on a file), which IMHO makes it stronger than just having the fighting value of a chess K (i.e. 4), but bearing in mind the likelihood it's normally not as effective in battle as a Eurasian Chess R (even taking into account that a K also can diagonally restrict an opposing K's movements in this game, too).
One thing that may be worth mentioning as well is that K+P vs. lone K seems to be won if the superior side can 'protect' the P by being on the same file. Then the P can be pushed through to promotion, with its K always staying on the file behind it, as the lone K will always be forced to give way by zugzwang (the superior side's K makes a move on the same file if and when necessary).
The Asian contribution to this game is a bit meagre; basically it is an orthodox FIDE army augmented with two types of Cannons, only one of those of true Asian descent. That did not stop it from becoming one of the top favorites of this site, however.
This looks like a great game. A 10x10 board perhaps is as about as big a board one can hope to fit on a coffee table (e.g. as a decorative board), and still use fairly standard size chess pieces with.
Let's keep this more or less anonymous for now - it's only fair. I will disagree with the previous poster. I've played Eurasian Chess a couple times now, and I find it to be an excellent game. In reference to your specific comment about the number of pawns, well, what are the purposes of a pawn? This game is played with all the standard Western pieces. Without the twin pawn barriers between the pieces, the game would most likely devolve into an early shoot-out. I would expect this to give White a major advantage with the first move. I have a question: what pawns would you remove? Gotta leave the rook pawns. Just taking 2 pawns out, say the knight pawns, hardly seems worth it. If you want 2 modest variants, try Six Pawn Chess. One variant removes the knights' pawns and the other the bishops' pawns. And here's another question: what do the first 10 moves look like? In Eurasian or 6-pawn? Wouldn't the major pieces, especially rooks, slide through those holes? We'll ignore the queen rampages, because they happen anyway. The 'Mad Queen' has earned its name. Everyone remembers what queens did when we were just learning the game. Knights messed us over badly, but queens ruled. Why would removing pawns from Eurasian or regular chess produce a game any different from the bloodbaths we all experienced back when?
This game, of course, deserves to be called 'Eurasian', i think, opinion of anonimous reader is strange. It's not based on all European and Asian forms of chess, but on form, wich is most popular in far east (XQ is popular not only in China) and on most popular European form. I don't think that there must be pices from Shogi: Shogi is only popular among Japanese and chess variantists. But there are mostly FIDE pieces because they are very playable, this combination of pieces made FIDE chess the most popular game in Europe. If Fergus Duhino would really wanted to make game with most used pieces, he really would put silver general instead bishop, as told anonimous reader, but it would be mistake, and he did not made this mistake. I think, telling that 'rook and knight was used in most forms of chess and bishop was invented independtly by both Europeans and Japanese' is srange excuse of using FIDE pieces, especially about bishop... It don't need excuses, using playable pieces is right. Only thing, wich i would add to this game is cannon queen, but it's not necessary, game is perfect without it to. M Winther, Bulgarian chess is scam?! Please, give me link to page with information about it - i want to know details. And another one curious thing: in 7 players Chinese chess queen don't mathche, but bishop do. Bishop also was in 'Citadel Shatrang' under name Dababa, so bishop was invented independently many times.
I just want tell one curious thing: queen also where in one historical Chinese game (it's Xiang-qi variant, but actually only common thing with it is what it's Chines and played on intersections): http://www.chessvariants.org/xiangqivariants.dir/chin7.html
The european invention of the queen was precedented by the Japanese invention of the 'Free King' in large Shogi variants (like Chu shogi) by some centuries. What is more striking in this context is that the european obsession since Carrera, namely the Chancellor/Marshall and the Janus/Paladin pieces, does not occur in asian chess variants. This says---IMO---something about the quality of the pieces: The Queen/Free King is a perfect chess piece while the other two leave something open. Back to Eurasian chess: It has a nice piece and rule mix and makes a great variant (learning from several other excellent games). For my taste, the Eurasian pawn is a bit too complicated and the rules concerning the pawn could be simplified. Promotion to captured pieces only has an old-fashioned look, at least.
Game, wich 'desrves' name 'Eurasian chess' is here: http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/glennsdecimal.html
As Variant Chess magazine has argued, Bolyar Chess (Bulgarian Chess) is a scam. All the historical evidence for it is constructed. Moreover, the variant is clearly inferior. /Mats
It's me, who written coment that this game didn't deserve it's name. Ok, maybe i am not right, but i still think that game must have some piece wich is used only in Shogi. Or at least add promotion of some pieces other than pawns (at least, promoting piece like Sage to Dragon Horse). It will make Shogi feeling a bit higer (there are nothing in this game wich is only from Shogi). About boat: sorry, i made mistake: boat had same move as alfil, i forgot it. You can read read about Bulgarian chess here: http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MLbolyarchess This game is not as known as Shatar, Grande Acedrex, Tafl and others, so i will not approv if someone decide to make 'Eurasian chess' with pieces from it, i just liked Bulgarian chess and i am sad that it's not well-known, that's why i have mentioned then. So, maybe this game really deserves it's name (almost), but it's still good idea to make game with pieces from several different hystorical games.
Good game, but it did'nt deserve to be called 'Eurasian'.
On that, we disagree.
There are only one piece wich is exactly Asian (Pao) and only one piece wich is exactly European (Queen).
I would use the word 'exclusively' in place of 'exactly' but otherwise agree. Except for the Vao, the rest are found in both European and Asian regional variants.
Vao is fairy chess piece, so it's neither European, nor Asian.
That is a non sequitur. It is both by virtue of descent, in much the same way that a Canadian like Kristen Kreuk can be called Eurasian.
Using piecec, wich are both European and Asian is primitive.
Would you care to explain what that even means?
If there will be game, wich uses these pieces, it will really deserve to be called Eurasian!
There are, of course, other ways to make Chess variants that blend together European and Asian elements, but what you suggest would not blend together elements of the major regional variants of Europe and Asia as well as this game does, and consequently a game with the pieces you suggest would be less deserving of the name Eurasian Chess.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Why do you think a Knight is worth more than a Bishop? Wouldn't the Bishop's value relative to the Knight's increase as the board expanded from 8x8 to 10x10?