Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments by Tony Paletta

Earlier Reverse Order LaterLatest
Overprotection Chess. If an attacked piece is more often defended than it is attacked, it gains extra powers. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 06:24 PM UTC:
Apart from the paradox problem, the need to take into account temporary
powers makes assessment of overprotection a bit complicated. 

I would suggest ignoring temporary powers in assessing overprotection.

Chigorin Chess. White has knights instead of bishops and a chancellor for his queen; black has bishops instead of knights. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Tue, Apr 9, 2002 06:48 PM UTC:
This variant seems to favor Black materially by at least a pawn.

Tony Paletta wrote on Wed, Apr 10, 2002 02:21 PM UTC:
My comment that Black was ahead was based on R+B vs R+N multiplied by pawn promotion. The B vs N is probably just a wash -- maybe giving White some early play but moving towards Black in mid-end play.

Slanted Escalator Chess. Chess on an asymmetric board with interesting connectivity. (8x8, Cells: 60) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Wed, Apr 10, 2002 02:40 PM UTC:
Agree with gnohmon that there is an imbalance. Suggest reversing e-side escalator and transposing one side's royals (e.g., Kd1 and Qe1).

Full Double Chess. 32 pieces each, including all combinations of the basic Chess pieces, on a 16x8 square board. (16x8, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Wed, Apr 17, 2002 03:14 PM UTC:
He probably got the idea from all the 'Double Chess' variants that have
popped up in the past 100 years. 

Basically, though, few of the double-wide 'real' chess games play like
chess for club-strength (Class C and Up) chessplayers. Standard Knights
play a reduced role on larger boards (for example, 7 moves to move between
end files) and standard Bishops also lose some of their lateral value.
Adding power pieces is one way to compensate (whether 3 Qs, RN, BN,
whatever) but that tends to reduce minor pieces to sacrificial fodder. Fans
of more subtle play are likely to be disappointed.

I actually like the 'mate two Kings' idea in Sirotkin's game somewhat
better, as it compensates somewhat for the stronger forces and reigns in
the value of the initiative a bit (sacs that may win one K must be balanced
against a material disadvantage in pursing the other).

CV Pages as Lit[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Tony Paletta wrote on Fri, May 17, 2002 05:17 PM UTC:
MY personal preference is for CV proposals that contain a minimum of
narration and a straight-forward presentation of the author's rules. 

I'm OK with very brief comments that actually simplify learning the rules,
but I have very little interest in extended narratives.

Rectahex Chesss. A chess variant that looks like hexagonal chess but can be played on a normal chess board. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, Jan 16, 2003 04:28 AM UTC:
Glinski-type bishops can reach every third diagonal, so if the standard chess array position is used both bishops are limited to the same 1/3rd of the board.

Anti-Relay Chess[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Tony Paletta wrote on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 06:36 PM UTC:
Oops. 
In my previous comment on 'Anti-Relay', the example for the second
alternative should have both the f3 and f2 pieces temporarily =R+N+B.

Of course there are also some other options (gain/lose power only due to
friendly units, gain/lose only from hostile units; gain powers only due
friendly units, lose power only due to hostile units, etc.).

Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, May 1, 2003 03:48 PM UTC:
For anyone who might find the approach helpful, a very rough try at a
'faceted definition' of a movement rule for 'an Extended Relay Chess
Family' might look something like this. Pick one from each bracketed
category to get a CV (design new options that fit the structure; design a
new structure ...).


'Chessmen have intrinsic movement patterns: [intrinsic movement rules].
The movement powers of [affected group] are temporarily modified by the
intrinsic movement patterns of other chessmen. Chessmen affected by this
rule temporarily gain the unshared intrinsic movements of [gain source]
when [gain condition]; they temporarily lose the intrinsic movement
patterns shared with [loss source] when [loss condition].'


Some sample category options:

[intrinsic movement rules]   
  these patterns are the same as in standard chess, ...
[affected group]
  RNBQ, ... 
[gain source]
  friendly affected class units, 
  hostile affected class units, 
  any affected class units, ...
[gain condition]
  intrinsically observed by the source,  
  intrinsically observing the source,
  on a space adjacent to the source, ...
[loss source] 
  friendly affected class units, 
  hostile affected class units, 
  any affected class units, ...
[loss condition]
  intrinsically observed by the source, 
  intrinsically observing the source,
  on a space adjacent to the source, ...

Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, May 8, 2003 03:11 AM UTC:
An extension that might also be considered is the use of [gain-type] or
[loss-type]. Up to this point, the discussion has focused on adding or
subtracting the power to move or capture, but the relayed power added or
subtracted might be movement to a vacant space, movement to an
opponent-occupied space, movement to a vacant or opponent-occupied space,
etc..
(the possibilities might also include interchange powers -- the right to
switch places with a friendly piece).

I would also consider a piece observed by or a piece observing as only two
options in defining the 'source'. A relay-type relationship might also
be triggered by an absolute relationship (e.g., piece a K-move away,
N-move away, B-move away, etc.) -- essentially the [gain-condition] or
[loss-condition] could be defined by any rule that, when applied to a
potential source, temporarily evaluates to true. 

Obviously we don't have to use all the facets of 'generalized relay
chess' to define a CV in the family. A broader framework does allow some
curious family members.

A simple example might be called 'Channel Chess' -- Any RNBQ may move to
a vacant space with the movement power of the last friendly piece
captured.

Knot Chess. Board in shape of geometric knot.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, May 8, 2003 02:12 PM UTC:
Maybe I'm missing something: in what meaningful sense is Knot Chess not chess?

Rectahex Chesss. A chess variant that looks like hexagonal chess but can be played on a normal chess board. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, May 8, 2003 10:01 PM UTC:
In mentioning a three-geometry game, I meant a game which incorporated
piece movements derived from hexagon-tiled, square-tiled and
triangle-tiled chess variants. The board itself would involve one
geometry.

Consider a 12x12 board tiled with equilateral triangles (all have a one
horizontal side, a1 points at W, a2 at B, a3 at W ..., b1 points at B, c1
at W, etc.). Triangle chess movement (as in Dekle's Triangular Chess -
see Pritchard's Encyclopedia of Chess Variants) would be based on the
shapes, standard chess movement on the ranks and files (N leaps 2 ranks, 1
file or 2 files, 1 rank; R slides along rank or along file; B leaps in
1r,1f steps in same direction, etc.) and hexagonal movement would follow a
scheme similar to that in Hexoid Chess (/Rectahex Chesss). A hex-style
three-coloring of the board (a1-blue, a2-yellow, a3-red, a4-blue, ...
b1-yellow, b2-red, b3-blue, b4-yellow, ..., c1-red, c2-blue, c3-yellow,
...) would help a little for the hex movements.

On such a board we could have Standard Knights, Triangular Queens and
Hexagonal Rooks, etc. cheerfully (?) coexisting. Getting the hang of the
game would be a little tough -- but then again, who ever said unified
(playing) field theory would be easy?

Knot Chess. Board in shape of geometric knot.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Fri, May 9, 2003 12:26 PM UTC:
TQ,
I was with you almost to the end of the last sentence. 
Novelty would be fine. 'Variant concept'? - No! I'm too lazy to learn a
new word for CVs that AREN'T other CVs in disguise.

Chess Solitaire[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Tony Paletta wrote on Mon, May 19, 2003 11:26 PM UTC:
Since chess involves an interaction of at least two 'minds', one problem
may be trying to simulate the missing opponent. Man-vs-computer does a
pretty good job of creating a solitaire!

Rule-based moves (as in Chess Patience) or fixed, ordered lists of pieces
to move have been tried, but they lack the 'feel' of chess competition.
Problem solving (timed, possibly competitive, etc.) is a decent try at
creating a solitary chess-like activity.

ChessexA game information page
. Hexagonal chess variant for two or three players. (Cells: 169) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Wed, Jul 16, 2003 12:47 PM UTC:
The bishops are not colorbound; you misread the rules.

Magna Carta Chess. Black has the FIDE array, White has a Marshal and an Archbishop instead of a Queen and King. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Tue, Sep 16, 2003 06:21 PM UTC:
The game seems a bit better if White must have ONE of the two new pieces.

Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, Sep 18, 2003 03:30 AM UTC:
It's not surprising that Black has an edge if White must retain both the
RN and BN; I also agree that White is somewhat better if only one must be
retained. Finding a roughly balanced version of this CV might possibly
involve:
 
(a) weakening Black (Q limited to max of two spaces?) or strengthening
White (RNB instead of RN?) if White must retain both insurgent leaders or
 
(b) strengthening Black (RNB instead of RB?) and weakening White (R +
'vertical' or two rank N for RN, B + 'horizontal' or two file N for
BN?) if White must only retain one.

A second (related) change might be to limit promotion to R, N or B for
both players.

Cardinal. Moves as bishop or as knight.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Thu, Sep 18, 2003 04:02 AM UTC:
Yes. King and 'Cardinal' can mate lone King: On an 8x8 board the
checkmate takes 17 or fewer moves.

See http://www.chessvariants.com/misc.dir/endgames.html

(Analysis by Dave McCooey, who refers to the B+N as a 'Pegasus'.)

[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Tony Paletta wrote on Sun, Sep 28, 2003 12:02 AM UTC:
(Well, you asked)

A somewhat odd try at might be 'Nordic-QQ Chess'. Pieces are placed on
the borders of spaces within a rank (RNBQKQBNR; PPPP_PPPP) and are
presumed to be virtual domino chessmen occupying two spaces on the rank.
Two friendly chessmen may share a space, but not from the same border;
opposing pieces may not share a space.

The units move by choosing either the left or right space and moving as in
standard chess -- they may move through a space 'occupied' by a single
friendly unit, but not through a space 'occupied' by two friendly units
or an opposing unit. To come to rest on a space, units must resume either
the right position (if they moved via the left) or the right position (if
they moved via the left).

Units occuping a side edge are hanging over the board and have only one
path available. Moving to a border occupied by an opposing unit or onto a
space (before reoccupying the border) shared by one or more opposing units
produces one or more captures.

Magna Carta Chess. Black has the FIDE array, White has a Marshal and an Archbishop instead of a Queen and King. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Sun, Sep 28, 2003 08:16 AM UTC:
The revised rules (Black must retain a Q and a K, White a RN and a BN) still favor Black. The Rs, Ns and Bs are obviously balanced; the White RN vs Black RB are roughly balanced and therefore Ps and promotions are also roughly balanced. What's left is a White K vs a Black BN -- about a piece in standard 'point value' favoring Black if both weren't sort of royal, probably about half a piece favoring Black with the royalty restriction.

Tony Paletta wrote on Sun, Sep 28, 2003 09:30 AM UTC:
Got my comment a bit muddled. White (RN,BN) is favored over Black (RB,K) by
the revised rules (each must retain two pieces) -- for essentially the
reasons I gave. 

Upgrading the Black Q to RBN would almost balance the game, but the
maximum promotion to RBN for Black vs RN for White would favor Black. A
Black Q = RBN with promotions limited to R, B or N for both sides would
probably come pretty close to a balanced game.

Jumping Chess. Pieces capture by jumping. Board has extra edge squares making it 10x10. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Tony Paletta wrote on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 04:31 PM UTC:
A somewhat different, but related idea might be 'Amphibian Chess' (not
previously published; name chosen in comparison to 'Mermaid Chess' and a
tendency, in the problem lit, to use sea creature names for
vault-to-capture pieces).  Play is on an 8x8 board, and units must jump
over to capture if there is a next square beyond the opposing unit, but
capture by displacement if there is not.

[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Tony Paletta wrote on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 06:17 PM UTC:
'Amphibian Chess: Standard chess array and noncapturing moves of pieces.
Units must leap over opposing spaces on a normal arrival space to the next
space beyond to capture, unless the opposing unit is on the edge and there
is no 'next space beyond' in the direction of movement (in which case
the capture occurs as in standard chess). 

For the purpose of determining the next space beyond, a Knight's normal
leap is viewed as one space orthogonally followed by one space diagonally
(through a corner adjacent to the opposite side); a Knight's one space
beyond is one additional space diagonally (i.e., to a space a [3,2] leaper
might have reached).

All other rules are as in standard chess.'

Tony Paletta wrote on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 09:23 PM UTC:
When I first looked at what I call Amphibian Chess I had just viewed George
P. Jelliss's article on chess variants and found his description of 'Sea
Chess' (line pieces capture by vaulting to next space beyond). The term
'Sea pieces' was new to me (I was familiar with the 'Mermaid' or Q
version only), and I was struck with the practical flaw in the game:
pieces on the edge were relatively difficult to capture. Since the 'sea
pieces' were in contrast to the more usual FIDE (land?) pieces and
'amphibian' pieces seemed like an amusing compromise, I toyed with how
these pieces might work.
 
I looked at this as a 'thematic' task, and I usually focus on making
only the necessary changes to produce an interesting and (possibly)
playable game (Occam's razor, or something like that). The sea-land
compromise was obvious for line pieces, but Knights presented a problem.
Three possible solutions were considered:

(a) leave the standard Knight alone
(b) define a 'space beyond' to correspond to a second Knight's leap
(c) introduce a devise to break down the Knight's move

Choice (a) seemed unworthy of something called 'Amphibian Chess'. Choice
(b) was probably the most elegant option and it's playable, but it seems
to makes the 8x8 board seem pretty small. Instead, I chose choice (c) and
adopted the Chinese 'Mao' move.

Since Peter seemed to be addressing a similar problem, I added my comment.
The approach admits to several generalizations (e.g., other Amphibian
pieces) that you may wish to explore. I hope you and other CV enthusiasts
will do so.

BTW my 'rules' left out the qualification that the 'next space beyond'
should be vacant. (Sorry. Rule writing is a tough job.)

Tony Paletta wrote on Tue, Sep 30, 2003 12:54 AM UTC:
Peter: I think the defensive massing of pieces is probably of limited value
in Amphibian Chess. Knights can capture any unit on an edge (I preferred
the Mao-type over the Moa-type partially for that reason) and diagonal
movers can pick off corners or edge-resting units. Only the Rooks are
unequivocally weak against masses.

25 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order LaterLatest

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.