Check out Janggi (Korean Chess), our featured variant for December, 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/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order Later
Colorboundmost[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
gnohmon wrote on Fri, Jul 12, 2002 03:32 AM UTC:
In Absolutely Colorboundmost Chess, there must be as little interaction as
possible between pieces on squares of different colors.

As a consequence, there can be no Castling. A further consequence is that
you should really play it on two boards, lest the visual clutter become a
sort of interaction between the two colors.

The big surpsise is that it must be a doublemove game, one move on each
color. If you have only one move, and must decide between colors, that is a
form of interaction! (Yes, that interaction would make a better game; but
the absolute extreme colorboundmost chess has to be doublemove.)

Your Q is on the same color as the enemy K. This means that you start with
enough material superiority to mate the opponent -- but of course the
reverse is also true! I see this as a race game (pushing the boundaries of
race games!), and therefore immediately thought of Parton's 'Fair race
rule' from Racing Kings: if W gives mate, Black can draw by giving mate in
reply. (The question of who wins first is an interaction between the
colors, but it is unavoidable in a chess variant.)

However, since it's a doublemove game, an even better alternative is to
make it 'balanced'. W only gets to make one move first turn. 

To avoid interaction, the rules must specify on which color W must move on
the first turn!

Of course all the pieces and Pawns and Kings must be colorbound. (Also, a
game with weak interaction played as a singlemove game on a single board
would be more interesting; but the first step is to define the most
extremely absolute colorboundmost game possible!)

Am I correct in thinking that all these consequences follow inevitably from
the premise? Have I missed any? Is it interesting that this much of the
game can be specified without even thinking about how individual pieces
move?

gnohmon wrote on Sat, Jul 13, 2002 12:29 AM UTC:
Oops. I forgot while I was writing.

There's a specific reason not to use Parton's fair race rule with an
absolute doublemove game of Absolute Colorboundmost Chess. 

The reason is that symmetrical play gives Black a guaranteed draw!

Peter Aronson wrote on Tue, Jul 16, 2002 03:50 AM UTC:
An alternate approach to balancing Colorboundmost Chess would to follow the
path used in other double-move variants -- only have white make a single
move on their first move.  I would suggest having white make their first
move on white, so that each player would make the first move on their
King's color.

Once you have white making only a single starting move, it should no
longer be possible for black to mirror white, so race rules could be
applied.

3 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.