[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by MichaelNelson
Poker Chess. Squares contain cards, and players win by forming poker hands with the cards on the squares occupied by their pieces. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]How about loser chooses who moves first the next turn? This opens possiblities of losing intentionally, so lets add a rule that the player who moved last chooses his cards first.
Legler's Chess. Modest 1926 variant using an Archbishop and a Chancellor. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've found that the BN is about halfway between the R and Q in value, 6.5 pawns for Spielmann values. (I agree with Ralph Betza that Spielmann values are more correct than the beginner's 1-3-5-9 scale.) Ralph methods rate it at 4 atoms = 6.5 pawns. Note the following: 1 atom piece (Wazir) = 1.5 pawns 2 atom piece (Knight) = 3.0 pawns 3 atom piece (Rook) = 4.5 pawns 4 atom piece (BN) = 6.5 pawns* 5 atom piece (Queen) = 8.5 pawns 6 atom piece (RNN) =10.5 pawns* 7 atom piece (Amazon) =12.5 pawns* * Hypothetical Spielmann values Pieces of Rook-strenght or less obey the equivalence 1 atom = 1.5 pawns, but stronger pieces seem to gain additional value. I assume this is because the strong pieces normally mask the weakesses of their components. So rather than giving the BN a bonus for not being colorbound, a colorbound 4-atom piece (Bishop-Camel for example) should be penalized. Also note the each simple piece had one major weakness: Knight: Short range Bishop: Colorbound Rook: only 1/4 of its moves are forward So BN, RN and Queen all mask two major weakness.
Intersting application of Enneagram theory. How would you classify Ralph Betza, a master Chess player and probably the most most prolific living CV designer? Or Tony Quintanilla, who is a quite strong CV player and a skillful, creative CV designer?
Fergus, Just the kind of detail I was hoping for--your response was very clear and quite well-reasoned. Thank you.
Caïssa Britannia. British themed variant with Lions, Unicorns, Dragons, Anglican Bishops, and a royal Queen. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]It is implicit in the rules that the Royal Queen cannot capture a Prince Consort from a distance. The Royal Quuen cannot move through check, and would be in check when it reached the adjecent square! If the Queen is already adjacent to the Prince Consort, it is already in check and may capture the Prince Consort if it is undefended.
A really good game--the pieces are unusual, but no so unusual that clarity is seriously compromised. The piece set works well together.
Pied Color Chess. Oh no! All the colors on the board have been scrambled -- however will the pieces move? (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]What a fine game concept! Some possiblitities: 1. (For equal armies) Randomly choose colors for ranks 1-4 and make corresponding squares opposite colors, thus if a1 is white, a8 is black. The symmetrical board will not favor either side. 2. (For different armies) All squares start out uncolored. Black chooses his army, then white chooses his army and makes the first choice of squares. Players alternate choosing the color of any square on their half of the board--the corresponding square becomes the opposite color as above. The armies are then put on the board and play begins. The board almost certainly will favor one side.
Pocket Mutation Chess. Take one of your pieces off the board, maybe change it, keep it in reserve, and drop it on the board later. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There will be a ZRF posted. Until it's on the CV pages, I will send a copy by email to anyone who requests it. I think my playing tip about not using the pocket just to mutate a piece might well be extended to promotion as well -- don't aim for promotion as your sole objective -- try to gain a material or positional advantage in addition. The kind of pawn promotion I like is dropping a pawn on the seventh rank to fork two pieces and threaten to make a Bishop or Knight. In general, moves with multiple objectives will be even more frequent than in FIDE Chess. Astute readers will notice that the value classes are based on Ralph Betza's Atomic Thoery of Piece Values. The equivalances are not exact -- a SuperBishop is measurably stronger than a Rook, but the difference is small enough (half a pawn, maybe) that positional factors can easily override it. If anyone does want an alternate piece set, I would suggest a coherent set based on a small number of elements. My piece set is based on three pieces (Knight, Bishop, Rook) and their combinations plus three enhancements (change Knight to Nightrider, add Wazir to Bishop, add Ferz to Rook).
Promotion does dominate the endgame. When the board gets empty, the number of pieces is often more important than their strength--the player with more pieces can usually afford to trade a Queen for a Rook or sometimes a Bishop. King and anything vs. King is a win--the enemy King can't defend the whole eighth rank. So you just keep promoting or mutating until you have King and Rook vs. King or better.
Some thoughts on the pieces: The pawn is about the same value as in FIDE Chess: while it can only promote to Bishop, it promotes to a Bishop that is itself promotable. I don't expect to see an AmazonRider in an actual well-played game, but I just had to have it for logical completeness. I wonder if an AmazonRider is really all that more powerful than an Amazon on an 8x8 board: the difference certainly feels less than the gap between Knight and Nightrider. The SuperChancellor can mate unassisted--the only value class 6 piece which can do so. The leveling effect among pieces of the same value class is stronger than in other chess variants, since by spending a tempo, you can mutate one into another. On the other hand, among pieces in the same value class their are slight differnces in value based on the type of position. In open/wide open positions, the most valuable move components seem to be Rook, Bishop, Knight in order and Wazir or Ferz is a more valuable enhancement than Nightrider. In closed/severly closed positions, the reverse is true. In-between positons seem to favor Bishops.
Shogi. The Japanese form of Chess, in which players get to keep and replay captured pieces. (9x9, Cells: 81) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Piece values will be more elastic in Shogi than in FIDE Chess--there will be more positions in which a Bishop is stronger than a Rook, for example. But Shogi piece values do exist. Try this thought experiment: Give one player both Bishops and both Rooks and the other player four Lances. The player starting with the Rooks and Bishops will win every game (assuming that there is not a gross disparity in skill). This must mean that Rooks and Bishops are more valuable than Lances--and if there is a difference, it is possible in principle to quantify it. 'The Value of Shogi Pieces' is simply a tougher problem than (the ridiculously difficult problem) 'The Value of Chess Pieces' and the answers will have a higher level of uncertainty.
The FIDE Laws Of Chess. The official rules of Chess from the World Chess Federation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The player whose opponent has no time left wins in both cases--it would be a draw if the player with time left had only his King. See Law 10.14.
Unless triple repetition or the fifty-move rule applies, White loses if he exceeds the time limit in this position, even though for a decent player this is a winning position. The only case where exceeding the time limit is a draw is if the opponent has a bare King--the case when the opponent couldn't win no matter how badly the other player plays. In the positon you gave you should win but could lose if you played very, very badly--so exceeding the time limit is a loss. If you are in bad time trouble but haven't yet gone over the limit, it might be a good idea to offer a draw--the opponent may well accept since he will lose if you are able to make the winning moves quickly enough. He might prefer to take the sure half point form a lost postion than gamble on you going over.
The FIDE Laws Of Chess. The official rules of Chess from the World Chess Federation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I believe the list of insufficent force draws should be limited to those cases where neither side can win with the game played as a helpmate--no illegal moves, but both sides cooperating to mate one side. This would clearly be a manageably-sized list that wouldn't change after it was drafted--the list in the laws is incomplete but probably not by a lot.
<p>
The list in law 10.4 should be extended to these positions and law 10.5 should be amended to have a draw when a player exceeds the time limit if the opponents pieces would be on list as drawn vs a bare King. The exact forces the time-limit violator has shouldn't matter--why should a player with King vs King and Knight get a draw while a player with King and Rook vs King and Knight gets a loss?
<p>
This should still be a mangable level of complexity but would be more equitable.
I have changed my mind about this. Overstepping the time limit should lose no matter what the positon on the board is (excepting the case where the game has actally ended by checkmate, etc. but the player didn't stop his clock). The reasoning is simple--the opponent of the violator observed the time limit. If he had also violated the limit, he might well have found better moves. How much better, who can say? Certainly it is possible he could have played enough better to change a loss into a win.
84 Spaces Contest. Information/proposal on judgement of the contest.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Does anyone have image files for the Excelsior ZRF? They are missing from the zip on the Excelsior page. I have ZRF's for evwery other game in Group A and it might put the game at an unfair disadvantage in the judging, since I have used Zillions for playtesting all the other games.
I have the Excelsior files I need. Thank you to Antoine Fourierre and Dan Troyka for your prompt responses.
Chess with Different Armies 
. Download this file to see this game played in the Multivariant Play by E-Mail Tournament.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Very well done page! The Rookies will almost always win the endgame between these armies, the challenge is getting there. Something as seemingly small as a single advanced Pawn proved decisive in this game--just like FIDE Chess. How different and yet how the same. There needs to be an evaluation well above Excellent for CWDA.
Chess with Different Armies. Betza's classic variant where white and black play with different sets of pieces. (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Actually, .zsg files are plain text and are not covered by licenses, any more than the data files created by a word processor. The text is mainly the move list in full algebraic notation with a small amount of easily ignored bookeping data. I would urge anyone who wants to examine these saved games to download the files even if you don't currently own Zillions--you will be able to read them.
Pocket Polypiece Chess 43. Game with off-board pocket where all pieces of a type change when one piece of a type is moved normally. (7x6, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]This game deserves an Excellent for the concept, but a small reworking might be nessessary. Some limitation on hogging the pocket seems needed--perhaps the cube variant is some help, but I would suggest that the pocketed piece be immune from capture for only a limited time (2 or 3 turns perhaps, playtesting would be required to determine the limit). After the limit is up, opponent can move to an occupied pocket and capture. I don't think that pawn pocketing variant is a good idea in view of the pocket hogging issue. I would also suggest this variant about flipping. A piece in the pocket is affected by flipping, but a move to or from the pocket doesn't cause filpping.
Rook Mania. Game where all pieces have different sorts of Rook-like moves. (7x7, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I like the overall flavor of this game and am looking forward to your revisions. Personally, I don't care for the Coordinator. Pehaps the last pawn should instead promote to a piece its owner has lost (any time after the capture of the next-to-last pawn, counts as a move)--maybe you could extend this to the last two pawns, at the players option--this strengthens the pawn by making capturing them self-defeating beyond a certain point.
Contest to design a chess variant on 43 squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I am impressed with the overall level of submissions in this contest. Designing a good small variant is <i>much</i> harder than designing a good large variant, and designing a good large variant isn't exactly easy.
Rook Mania. Game where all pieces have different sorts of Rook-like moves. (7x7, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating](I inavertently posted my comment to the wrong thread.)
Pocket Polypiece Chess 43. Game with off-board pocket where all pieces of a type change when one piece of a type is moved normally. (7x6, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Antoine, Your'e welcome. I find your proposed flipping rule quite interesting, though the one you had is also playable. I don't know if the modified cube rule is really needed in the opening and middlegame. In general, hogging the pocket by putting a piece there and leaving it for 20 turns is self-defeating, anyway. But there is one type of endgame I would urge you to consider: You have King and two Windmills vs. my King, two Bishops, and Knight. At the moment, your Windmills are not adjacent to anything. If the pocket is empty and there is no cube rule or you have the cube, you can use the pocket to move your Windmills. If there is a cube rule and I have the cube, your Windmills are immobile if I can keep your King away from them. If there is no cube rule and it's my move I can immobilize your Windmills by putting the Knight in the pocket and leaving it there. Do you want this type of endgame? I have a set of rules about the pocket you might want to consider: 1. If the pocket is empty either player may move a piece into it except as provided by rule 5. 2. When a piece has been in the pocket for three turns, its owner must move the piece out of the pocket on the next turn. 3. If the player is in check when rule 2 applies and he can relieve the check by moving the piece out of the pocket, he must do so. 4. If the player is in check when rule 2 applies and he can't relieve the check by moving the piece out of the pocket, the player makes any move that relieves the check and must move the piece out of the pocket on his next turn. 5. When a player moves a piece out of the pocket, he may not move this or another piece into the pocket until the pocket has been empty for three turns or the opponent has moved a piece into and out of the pocket. Three turns is a guess, you will want to experiment.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.