[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by PeterAronson
Captain Spalding Chess 
. Find an Elephant in your Pajamas.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The current release of the ZRF is now 1.2. By rewriting the neutral piece moving code to generate a single looping move entry instead of 64 move entries I have got this to the point where is loads and runs successfully on at least some Windows XP box (I would like reports from people running Windows XP about their experiances). This also has the side effect that the ZRF seems to run a bit faster, and examines more positions in the same time as a result. There turns out not to be an elephant problem as reported earlier -- that was a misunderstanding.
Captain Spalding Chess. Find an Elephant in your Pajamas.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]After playing around with this game a bit, it seems to me that the Great
Pajamas are somewhat disadvantaged: the Box can pull out unlimited Bats,
as long as the one per column rule is followed, and the Pajamas can keep
pulling out Elephants, as long as there is only one of your color on the
board at a time, but once the Great Pajamas have pulled out the Great
Elephant, all they can do is generate Dust Bunnies and Dust Demons. It
doesn't seem fair.
<p>
Perhaps the Great Pajamas should also be able to pull out an Investigator
and/or a Cook. Cooks, as we know from Cheskers, are Camels (Long Knights).
An Investigator would be a Nemesis -- a piece that moves like a King, but
only towards the opposing Royal piece. Now, in Captain Spalding Chess that
would be too powerful, so perhaps it could have a Nemesis that moves like
a Wazir, but can only makes moves that would leave it closer to the opposing
Box. If an Investigator is captured, it may be pulled out by the Great
Pajamas again.
Here's a little throwaway thought I had on the morning drive:
<h3>Card Chess Without Randomness or Hidden Information</h3>
People have used cards to add an element of randomness to Chess, probably
for centuries. I have no problem with this, but some people do, a fact
that led me to wonder if an interesting version of Chess with Cards
containing no random elements or other hidden information could be
constructed.
<h4>The Equipment</h4>
Each player starts with 16 cards, 15 of which contain all the possible
unordered combinations of two pieces, and the last of which is a wild
card. Thus:
<p>
PN, PB, PR, PQ, PK, NB, NR, NQ, NK, BR, BQ, BK, NQ, NK, QK, Wild.
<h4>The Play</h4>
To move a piece, a player must have a card with either that piece on the
card or they must have a wild card. Upon moving that piece, they hand the
card they used to allow the move to their opponent, who adds it to their
own cards.
<p>
If a player has no card that would allow them to move any of their pieces,
they lose. Other forms of stalemate are also losses.
<p>
Pieces give check even without their player having a card that would allow
them to move the piece.
<p>
If the King is in check, it may be moved either by playing a card with a
King on it, or by playing a card with a piece attacking the King on it.
If the King is in check and you have no card that would allow it to move,
then it is mate.
<h4>Chess with Different Armies</h4>
This scheme ought to work OK with Chess with Different Armies, although I
am not entirely sure what the consequences are, since the relative
strength of pieces from equivalent array positions differ (for example,
in the Remarkable Rookies the 'Bishop' is Rook strength, and the 'Rook' is
a minor piece; the Colorbound Clobberers are even more oddly distributed).
<h4>Comments</h4>
Since there are plenty of cards with each piece, openings ought to be
fairly standard. Things start to get weird when players lose all of types
of piece. If a player has no Knights, Bishops or Queens, then the cards
NB, NQ and BQ will never leave their hands.
<p>
Possibly there are too many cards with each piece on them.
ximeracak.. A leaper-heavy fantasy variant designed for play with a standard set. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I wonder if this proposed Pegasus/General swap rule ought require the Pegasus to be defending the King. Thus, you could first drive off the Pegasus, then mate.
I like your 10 card set -- it makes card hording more practical, while
allowing the Kings and Pawns reasonably mobile. And with 6 out of 10
cards showing the King, I agree the special King privilege to use the
attacking piece's card when in check is not in necessary.
<hr>
:: Peter, you think too much! :)
<p>
Well, 'Die Gedanken sind frei', I guess :)
An issue has occured to me -- under the rules I've defined, Black will always have one or two cards more than white, which is probably excessive.
<p>
Here's an idea to correct it:
<ul>
<p>
<li>
White starts with 1 copy each of all cards except the wild card, black starts with the cards white does, plus 1 wild card.
</li>
<p>
<li>
On white's first move, they use no card; thus black starts with the wild card and with one more card than white.
</li>
</ul>
Black starting with the wild card offsets white's first move advantage some, hopefully.
Castling as a King move is a good idea, I think. The endgame. Hmm. A K + Q vs K endgame could be stymied by the player with the bare King holding on to the KQ, PQ and (Wild) cards. I wonder if some additional mechanism is called for. Of course, it needs to be seen if this game comes down to situations like that. Pawns are relatively mobile, and because there are many cards that let Pawns move, they defend each other with greater effectiveness than other pieces. It seems to indicate that Pawnless endgames may not be as common as in usual Chess.
Another possibility is to use as a base game where material doesn't decrease over the course of the game, such as Chessgi. Of course, to some extent card hording is a good thing in the context of this game, as it allows some additional tactics, and using Chessgi as a base would decrease the possibility for this.
<p>
One could go for more radical modifications, of course, but they would be less Chess-like. For instance, if a player has no Pawns, and has no cards that would allow them to move any piece but their King, they may drop a Pawn using a Pawn card on any unoccupied square on their 2nd rank. That, combined with promotion, might allow more decisive endgames.
Multivariant Tournament 2003. 2003 Multivariant PBEM tournament headquarters page.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Mike, Chess with Different Armies had its own tournament last year. Unfortunately, it only got four players (of which I came in last, alas!).
New sets of Exchess (Superchess). Announcement of sets of chess variant pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I fixed the link. For some this page was immune to normal editing, but
fortunately emacs provided a way.
Alfaerie Expansion Set 3. More chess variant graphics based on the Alpha chess font.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Very nice! But if this is expansion set 4, what happened to 2 and 3?
Vincent wrote:
<i><blockquote>
I've considered the vast majority of the chess variants on these pages,
and, after some study, research, and play-testing, I found a grand total
of two that I feel are worth my time to play: Gothic Chess & Omega Chess,
and neither of them are on the list...
</blockquote></i>
Hmm. Tastes do vary. I've only gotten around to playing about 82+- of the
games on this site by my latest count (that is, with people, bunches more
with Zillions, but playing Chess variants against computers is rather
like a [analogy left out as this is a family website]), and I would say
almost all of them were worth my time to play, although some I am in no
particular hurry to play again soon. What is it you were looking for in
a CV? In particular, what were you looking for where you would leave off
Xiangqi and Shogi, games that are far more widely popular than either
Omega Chess or Gothic Chess?
Piececlopeida: Advancer. Moves like a Queen, but captures by approach.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating] Extinction chess. Win by making your opponents pieces of one type extinct. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Actually, this game can be found in the standard Chess ZRF that comes with Zillions.
Alice Chess. Classic Variant where pieces switch between two boards whenever they move. (2x(8x8), Cells: 128) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Whoops! Diagram fixed -- thanks for pointing it out.
Dai Shogi
. Shogi variant on 15 by 15 board. (Link.).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating] Chu Shogi. Members-Only Shogi variant on 12 by 12 board. (Link.).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Things are too quite here, so I'm going to ramble on a bit.
<p>
Orthochess has a piece density of 50% -- 16 pieces on each side, and
64 squares on which to put them. Most variants on 8x8 keep that piece
density, but almost all variants on 10x10 boards have a lower density.
For example, recently Modern Kamil and a set of Chess with Ultima,
Rococo and Supremo Pieces variants have been published on these pages,
all with a density of 40%. This effects play a fair bit.
<p>
It's not just these recent variants, either of course. Grand Chess has a
density of 40%, while Omega Chess has a density of 42%. Of course, those
variants that keep a board of 8 rows, no matter how long, such as Gothic
Chess or King's Court or (David Short's) Double Chess can keep a density
of 50%. But very wide boards increase the power of orthogonal pieces at
the expense of other pieces. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it
has a definite effect on the play of the game.
<p>
One reason for the lower piece density is a certain reluctance to go to
three row arrays. Mind you, Al-Ces has a full three-line array with a
piece density of 60%, but it's a game that takes a very long time to play.
That might be a lot of the reason. I have an unpublished Chess variant
on a 10x10 board that I playtested with Tony Quantilla where each side had
25 pieces (10 Pawns, 3 'Super-Pawns' and 12 pieces per side), and it seemed
like we had a ton of material each. While Tony got the upper hand on me
early on, it seemed like it took forever for him to finish me off. Perhaps
20-22 pieces is right number to have on a 10x10 board if you want fairly
Orthchess-like play.
<p>
The moral of this rambling? Maybe you can't compare densities between
different size boards. Perhaps there is some better measurement out there
(although if you are trying for a game whose play is not much like
Orthochess, then you shouldn't care, anyway).
Michael
<p>
I got a little sloppy there talking about diagonal moves. Indeed a wider
board allows a diagonal moving piece access to a higher percentage of
longer moves. However, consider a 12x8 board. The longest possible Bishop
move is 7 squares, but the longest possible Rook or Queen move is 11. And
while in the opening and midgame those forward attacking moves are the most
important, this is less so in the endgame.
<p>
Your big project sounds reminiscent of Parton's 2000 AD or Royal Fury.
This, no doubt, why you've been playing around with Gorgonas
(what about Gorgons? -- now <strong>there's</strong> a piece to shudder
over!). I'd be interested in seeing what you've got, although I can't
promise to spend much time on it at the moment.
<p>
<hr>
<p>
John
<p>
I think Xiangqi's low density gives the game a lot of its distinctive
character.
Random Wormhole Chess (deleted). Introduces "wormholes" and "toroidal" movement to the game in a fun and manageable way. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]A neat concept for light game! A few questions:
<p><ul><li>
Is it allowed for a wormhole to form such
that it causes a stalemate?
</li><p><li>
Assume a white Pawn on a7, and a wormhole on a8 -- if the white Pawn moves
forward, does it end up on a1 without promoting? If so, can it doublemove
from a1? What if it moves to a2?
</li><p><li>
Can a wormhole be <em>removed</em> in such a way as to put a King in
check?
</li></ul>
An even stronger form of asymmetric retreat is the fairy piece the
<a href='../piececlopedia.dir/locust.html'>Locust</a> as used in
<a href='../dpieces.dir/edgehog-chess.html'>Edgehog Chess</a>. It
can only move to capture, and captures by leaping over a piece to
be captured to land on the empty square just past. Thus, while a
Grasshopper can
make a symmetrical retreat after leaping over an adjacent piece,
a Locust could only make a symmetrical retreat if a hostile piece moved
into the square it captured from.
Weave and Dungeon . Abstract game played on a board divided into Weave and Dungeon, with movement following different rules on each part.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Wonderful understated graphics on the ZRF! I'll comment on the game itself
once I've had a chance to play it.
Smess. Produced and sold in the early 70's by Parker Brothers. Arrows on squares determine direction pieces can move. (7x8, Cells: 56) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There are two versions of this game available for the computer game
Zillions of Games (see: http://www.zillionsofgames.com), one by Fergus Duniho (called 'All the King's Men' or 'Ninnychess'), available from this site, and one by Stephen Tavener (called 'Take the Brain') available from the Zillions site. Zillions is currently selling for about $15 dollars when downloaded from their site.
84 Spaces Contest. 84 Spaces Contest begins![All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.