Comments by Artem Shvorin

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Hybrids. Standard pieces combine and split. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Artem Shvorin wrote on Wed, May 18, 2005 06:43 AM UTC:

> What does it mean that equal pieces can form a hybrid?
It is possible to couple (for example) a pair of rooks. If there are rooks
on a1 and a2 it is possible to move one rook from a1 to a2 (I suggest the
following notation: Ra1^a2, or breafly R^a2, marking any 'hybridizing'
by '^' symbol).  As a result a hybrid Rook+Rook appears (designated by
'RR' symbol).  The worth of such homogeneous hybrids is dubious, though
it may be useful to bring a couple of slow units (knights or guards)
across the board; also this maneuver aids to concentrate pressure to a
certain point in blockaded position...

> Can a piece be a hybrid of more than two components?
The rule 2.3 says no.  It is noted that this rule is a subject to discuss.
 I thought about attack/defense balance, it seemed that hybrids are rather
strong (note that Rook+Bishop is a little bit stronger than ortodox Queen,
and usualy you have several such attackers) while King is too vulnerable,
so I decided to restrict attacking possibilities by rules 2.3 and 1 (Queen
is replaced by Guard).

Artem Shvorin wrote on Wed, May 18, 2005 07:05 AM UTC:

Recently I found a similar variant: <a href='/play/erf/ConfedCh.html'>Confederation</a> . The main difference is that in Confederation a piece cannot leave the hybrid while neither capturing nor forming a new hybrid with another piece. This restriction reduced the combinative power of hybrids and the game seems (for me ;) ) less interesting than Hybrids.

Artem Shvorin wrote on Thu, May 19, 2005 02:38 PM UTC:

I see that in Fusion Chess (like in Confederation and unlike in Hybrids) a compound piece can split only by moving into an empty square.

3 comments displayed

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.