[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
He had realised WHY the two players have different objectives. Because the Knight always moves from white to black square or vv, it cannot lowe the move, and in an army of just a Knight every move must be by that Knight. Therefore ONLY the player who moves second can capture.
So simple yet interesting. I wonder how it would work with alternate pieces? Maybe Camels instead of knights? Or maybe one player a Knight, the other a Centaur?
Calvin Daniels, playing with camels is just like playing with knights, but on diamond board with 32 squares. But zebras (for example) will make different game. What did you imply when you said 'centaur'? There are several pieces with such name. If you meant king+knight (probably, you didn't), centaur's player will have advantage.
See also 'Joust', described here http://www.chessvariants.org/programs.dir/joust.html and with Friedlander applet here /play/erf/Joust.html (In Joust, the question as to whether the knights can capture one another is interesting. If yes, only one player has this option and thus an advantage (?); but if no, one player has an additional blocking ability that the other does not.) Joust is interesting from a mathematical combinatorial game theory perspective, as it should be solvable with enough thought/force. Knight Chase introduces an extra element of droppable markers and a time limit, which should make mathematical statements more difficult.
Yes Centaur knight/King, a piece I think is under used in variants
I think a rule is missing here regarding the placement of the second marker. Gamut of Games reads, "The other can be placed in any empty space the player wishes, except that if only one space is open for the opponent's upcoming move, the space cannot be covered."
I don't see this rule above.
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.