Item Index Information

Canyon Chess is a game information page. It is categorized as: Two dimensional, Small board.

Canyon Chess. Small variant with Marshalls and Archbishops and some new rules. (8x8, Cells: 44)

Other Information

The board used for this game has 8 row(s), 8 column(s), 44 cells/squares.
This game is a 2 player game.
Invented in the year 2004. [2003-2005]. [1999-2009].

Other Options

Browse items that also start with the letter C.
Browse items that also start with the letters Ca.
Browse items that also start with the letters Can.
Browse similar items.
Browse items with a similar board.
Add a comment or rate this item.
Skip to comments section.

Index Maintenance

[edit] [links] [associate image] [associate text] [info] [quick edit]

Group ID 'canyon'

Comments

Erez Schatz wrote on Thu, Oct 21, 2004 11:04 AM EDT:

I agree. Although it wasn't one of my favourite games, I wouldn't rush to
lable it 'poor'. I think the board and the pieces placement was quite
nice, my quirk with it is that there are too much power pieces located on
what is a very small and limited board. I agree it is a manner of taste, I
use very restricted pieces in my small board designs, but if one likes to
play a game of power, kill-or-be-killed, then this variant offers a nice
solution.

There does seem to be a problem with the image, though.

Tony Quintanilla wrote on Thu, Jun 3, 2004 01:17 PM EDT:Good ★★★★

Well, I am going to break the mold here. I don't think its fair to the game to let a 'poor' rating dominate. There is justification for some of the comments, such as a lot of power for a small board; an odd-shaped board; a lot of board edge changes; and the possibility of 'stereotyped' play. However, the game should be played first before relegating it to the 'poor' bin. There are some good points: the use of Knight moves mitigates against the odd-shaped board; the higher power density provide more options on a small, restricted board. In fact, the odd-shaped board provides some of the interest, as the name implies. The game will probably be very tactical and very exchange driven. I think it would be fairly enjoyable. Give it a chance!

Charles Gilman wrote on Thu, Jun 3, 2004 03:37 AM EDT:

On the positive side:
The game can be played with a standard set, using Rooks and Bishops to
represent their Knight compounds.
I do not agree that a lack of diagram is good grounds for a rating of
poor, or that submissions should include a diagram. I have always found
that listing the first rank e.g. RNCCKBBNR enables the page editor to add
a diagram.
On the negative side:
The board is an awkward shape. The edge changes direction 36 times - even
for 4-player variants on a large board 12 is the norm, and this is a
2-player variant on a small board!
On balance I am inclined to rate this variant as poor, but as the first
rating of poor was not well grounded (and would be redundant even if it
were as a diagram has been provided) I will let that stand for mine.

🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Tue, Jun 1, 2004 09:42 PM EDT:

Having looked at the code for ffen2diag, the problem seems to be that it
generates a diagram as a series of linebreak-terminated lists of images. If it
generated a diagram as a table, CELLSPACING and CELLPADDING could be set
to zero, thereby allowing the diagrams to look right on Mozilla and
Netscape. This would also fix the problem of wrapping ranks, which I saw
one page.

Hans Bodlaender wrote on Tue, Jun 1, 2004 05:38 AM EDT:

I'm using Opera myself, and ffen2diag never gives problems there.

Number of ratings: 1, Average rating: Good, Number of comments: 13

Item Index Information

Other Information

Other Options

See Also

Index Maintenance