Enter Your Reply

There seems to be something of a difference of opinion here, with Christine
saying: 'Well i know pawns really hold a game together, without the pawns
things are pretty chaotic and all over the place. Play some short range
piece game where pieces cannot attack each other from the start, without
pawns, and you will get an idea what pawns do.'

Charles, on the other hand, sees it this way: 'Well a rank full of
Pawnlike pieces can be disadvantageous in a game dominated by short-range
pieces...' and goes on to give examples of mini-games where any white pawn
move results in a pawn loss for white. By having a 'picket fence' pawn
line, this problem is eliminated. 

Charles, I gotta go with Christine on this one. She wins by virtue of a
better example. I have played 'some short range piece game where pieces
cannot attack each other from the start, without pawns...' several times -
Texas Two-Step. That 'obscure political commentary' illustrates
Christine's point very well. Further, while I concede there are Eastern
variants that do very well with a picket fence pawn array, their pieces are
generally weaker than the Western variants. The use of weaker and
shorter-ranged pieces may be a requirement for a good game which uses a
picket fence, as stronger pieces would blow through the holes, or even lurk
deep in a hole to control a line or two of squares.

George proposes we adopt the pawn double step to mean 1 pawn stepping 2 or
2 pawns stepping 1 each. [And here's an odd question - could the opponent
capture 1 (or both?) pawn(s) en passant, by moving an appropriately-placed
pawn 1 square diagonally forward to occupy the square the pawn(s) moved
from? Seems only fair to me. :) ] In a large game like Cataclysm, the 2
pawns stepping 1 is such an excellent idea I'd like to see it expanded.
Let any pawn who has not yet moved 2 squares [or to the midline] to move 1
square along with another similar friendly pawn. In games where pawns may
move 3, allow 3 1-steps, or a 1 and a 2 step pawn move, up to the midline.
That sort of change should alleviate many complaints about slow openings in
big games. 

However, pacing in larger or slower games does not always need to be
speeded up. I'm currently playing a game of Short Range Courier Chess on
an 8x12 board, and the short range pieces and the slower 1-step shatranj
pawns impose a slower pace, but one well-suited to the particulars of the
game. In modern Western chess, pawns get a little play in the beginning,
but are often relegated to speed-bump status until the end of the game,
where they might get a little action again. In a large short-range game,
pawns are an essential part of your attack force as well as being strong
defensive pieces. This makes proper pawn development more critical. In such
games, most of my initial moves are pawn moves, easily 7 of my first 10
moves. [Grin, if you're curious to see how effective this is, you can play
a game with me; I've been winning my share.] Even with a large number of
leaping pieces, this eventually tends to give me more territory, which can
be decisive. Well, this is already overlong, and I've got chores. Enjoy!