Single Comment

<P>Hi Fergus, I guess this is the line you are refering to: 'Extended Chess aims at being a logical evolution to the game of chess and the innovations follow a logical way within the same idea of movement of traditional chess.'</P> <P>The concept of evolution in the game I'm refering to is that of making a change in the movement of the pieces but following the idea of its ancestors. Say a bishop, in extended chess bishops still move in diagonal but they have changed or evolutioned and now can also make turns. So for example, a bishop can now rebound in an edge or made a zig-zag move. Same with knights, they move like traditional knights but have the option of an extra move. Tough maybe youll be surpraised to know that the original idea was to give the knight a 3-leap move. In tests I realized that the 2-leap move was already complex and that the possibilities that brings are interesting enough.</P> <P>And pawns the same they are like a dynamic army being able to attack or retreat at will.</P> <P>Still, as I stated in my last post, I consider almost many of the variants an evolution of the game of chess, so its not in a sense of a right and only way to play a modified game of chess.</P> <P>From my point of view this variation can be considered by the moment as an amusing one to play for the wide possibilities that appear in every game, and if this variation has the deepness and coherent structure to remain a serious game is something that must be seen only after many games of playing it under a critical eye.</P> <P>You must see the short tale I wrote in schemingmind (the link is at the very end of the 2 games) to see what Im refering as an amusing variation, for I guess the history more or less identifies itself with it.</P>