[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Big Outer Chess. Large variant with concentric circles on the board, so there is less concentration on the centre. (12x12, Cells: 148) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]'ABCLargeCV': Chess with self-modifying rules may be long-term solution to the computer problem. Hopefully not. Big Outer pieces lose power toward the center within three zones. So, pieces have positionally self-modifying rules of movement. Ralph Betza's Turning Chess, Polypiece Chess, and 'Many Rules in One Game' use more extreme alterations of piece(s) and rules within a game. Antoine Fourriere's Pocket Polypiece is specific embodiment where two different of six types of pieces on both sides change their way of moving almost every turn. David Howe's Mega-Chess has pieces that are themselves recursively games of chess. A fully self-modifying game would not anticipate its own sets of rules ever-changing. In limited sense of continually modifiable rules in unusual methodology for CV, Big Outer is evaluated here as being original 'idea' game.
Another CV with self-modifying rules is Nomic Chess, an attempt to combine Nomic, Peter Suber's game of self-amendment, and Ralph Betza's Chess for Any Number of Players.
Peter Blanchard made only one CV, since everyone is entitled to just one if courtesy were only consideration. Doug Chatham's comment cites Nomic as another CV with self-modifying rules. Betza did this a lot in ones like Polypiece Chess, Turning Chess, and Many Rules in One Game. Those three of Betza are 2001 to 2003, so Betza is copying or further developing Blanchard's idea. Courier Chess gets mentioned a lot, but actually more interesting mediaeval Gala can be said to have self-modifying rules, in that pieces move differently according to where they are or where they go. So Blanchard is redeveloping idea over 500 years old, but the degree of rules-changing varies to the extreme of Nomic.
Okay, Jumper is Trilby, that is Trilby compounded with non-royal king move. Trilby is the Trebuchet plus Tripper under recent discussion at Gilman's Symgi and J. Good's Archabbott, where historian Ayer asks of the still rather few examples leaping radially three squares. Jumper is the only explicitly new p-t added to Big Outer. As far as that goes, Big Outer really has Rings, three separate ones, unlike other current topic, Gilman's hexagonal Ringworld's name would suggest for itself. What else? In jumping diagonally three spaces, Jumper may leap over one or two squares of the middle ring. Jumper loses the Trilby portion of option within the middle ring, it's just an outer phenomenom. Christine Bagley-Jones citation finds Three-Star General at Operational Chess II as Trilby, that and Operational I being wargames without King, some variantists may not (have) read. The ring around a starting square three-removed is particular interest for including the oblique, not radial, end-points in full as the simple Bison, complexified with pathways to Falcon -- become the correct match-up complement of Rook/Knight/Bishop, unlike straight jumper Bison the merely broadened Knight. Finally, let alone for the moment their cousins Amphibean (which need special definition attempted by Knappen), all of the strict three-square movers Tripper, Threeleaper/Trebuchet, Trilby, Falcon/Bison, Camel, Zebra, Nahbi and so on, can be variegated to still dozens more yet unclaimed differing p-ts by just commonsense Forwards/Sideways considerations, non-displacement capture combinations or restriction, and not least some area effect conveyed by the three Rings of fine cv of Blanchard, Big Outer Chess. And Big Outer has a genuine Trilby thirteen years ago! Actually I think there were either one or two '(0,3) plus (3,3)' in 1994 'ECV' should anyone take the time to page through it again.
H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Oct 22, 2022 08:05 PM UTC in reply to Greg Strong from 08:02 PM:Try refreshing the browser cache. It turned out that the fileOffset stuff was not correcting the initial squares mentioned in the Diagram's specification, and at some point I had corrected that in a wrong way so that all Diagrams without file offset went bad. The current version seems to work correctly for all Diagrams, though.
Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Oct 22, 2022 08:10 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 08:05 PM:Yep, that did it
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.