[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Score: Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Switching > Seirawan. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303 Sedulously availing all the symbolic help possible, legendary superannuated Betza is enlisted but not for Chess Unequal Armies, the Next Chess selected by himself before he skedaddled -- coincidentally in July 2003 the very month and year Charles Gilman as prolificist and myself as archivist began propounding wider and deeper perspectives, carrying the day, no longer beholden predominantly to the 1500-year 64-square philosopher's stone. Rather, Betza's Black Ghost, already 14 years old, steeped in Orthodoxy become otherworldly, exhibits a subtle, peculiar Mutator. The two other Mutators, Switching and Seirawan, have not fared well, landing in the last two spots thus far above. Non-capturing, teleporting Black Ghost purportedly helps equalise Black's opening dis-advantage. Does it overcompensate? Yes, according to consensus in the comments there. Regardless, some modified Black Ghost, such as allowed only so many times like 3 per game, might ultimately equalise. Belonging only to Black -- see other experimentation with White Ghost too -- Black Ghost is aesthetically unbalancing, however sliced and implemented. Why should White's first move necessarily be considered a problem anyway? First-move advantage, or dis-advantage at times in other CVs, as a rule ought to be just taken for granted as part of the landscape. So, interesting Black Ghost probably does not really address, let alone answer, any important issue of the day. It should be worth more ongoing study than Templar, and Templar's rather uninteresting up to two-step limited Bishop; and there Black Ghost is slotted. Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Switching > Seirawan.
Score: Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Switching > Seirawan. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303 [http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=23406 -- sorry, this number was by accident in completely random error, but leave it anyway to capture one forgotten prior state of affairs for relief at nearing halfway point...] 2 Queens, 3 Rooks, 4 Bishops, 5 Knights. Within the strict paradigm of those pieces alone, as Next Chess, Big Board may be as good as it gets, having good keen density on 10x10. Separate from the main-phase game-play, the preliminary set-up phase poses an entire unknown strategy -- that may outwit a program. For example, a Pawn set up in Rank 5 still has a nice two-step option once game-play commences. The set-up phase may be too time-consuming for maximum appreciation. There is also the similarity of Big Board to 'ECV' past CVs also randomizing by players' deliberate placements. Yet this looks awfully promising and would somehow be completely inadequate on old-style 8x8. Throwing caution to the winds, insert less-familiar dark horse Big Board with or above by a rank imperfect Centennial. Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Switching > Seirawan.
Big Board Chess seemed interesting. So I made a rule-enforcing Game Courier preset for it: Big Board Chess on Game Courier.
Score: Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan. Mobilization phase related to Big Board's set-up phase harks back to mediaeval Courier Chess as well as mediaeval assizes on regular 8x8 in Shatranj, having pre-modern Queen like Ferz and Alfil limited to 1/4 the squares. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/short_assize Mobilization and assizes can range from token like a single switch of two pieces for a different initial array to radical like Big Board. (Think of Big Board scaled back to half or fourth or twelfth its 24 pieces: even only 2 pre-mobilized of 24 would still be Big Board for its unique piece-mix.) The one Bodlaender notes for Courier has 3 Pawns and Queen pre-placed to fixed locations beyond the first two ranks. http://www.chessvariants.org/historic.dir/courier.html Obvious difference from assize-mobilization -- Ethiopian Chess being another example -- is the players choose locations in set-up phase like Big Board's. How the one-diagonal Queen gets from g1 to g3 in 8x12 Courier may not be explained even in Murray. Courier de la Dama mimics the Variant Chess CV by Byway called Modern Courier, linked by Cruz, in adding Queen to Courier Chess. The two CVs of Cruz and Byway are almost the same, as Cruz may have discovered late in his process; and of course the ''Modern'' among our finalists above and below is the different Modern 9x9 by Maura. Neither Cruz nor Byway seem to carry over the mediaeval mobilization, which is one of the two interesting features of the German Middle Age 8x12 Chess, the other being the full-line Bishop himself. In olden days 8x8 and 8x12 chiefly coexisted for some centuries. For Next Chess purpose, as one more to look at, Courier de la Dama goes alongside the Puerto Rican Modern as constructive combination of all earlier elements with no afterlife. Mastodon > Unicorn > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
Happy Solstice. Score: Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan. Responsive to discussion, Big Board like all of them is inclusive of its variants broadly interpreted, each one easily 100s of variants keeping its core intact. Also, correction: to any picayune, Modern and Courier de la Dama are reversed per original intent. The Stones are not Mutator so much as extraneous elements or maybe what Gilman was just investigating ''non-pieces'' or quasi-pieces. http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/contest/eightstones.html http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303 Representative Eight-Stone poses: what can be done in Next Chess medium by way of externalities? Lavieri's Promoter; Betza's Black Ghost -- that we did just call a mutator; Thompson's Trampoline; Aikin's Stones. Eight-Stone is the chosen example of thorough monkey-wrenching, spanners in the works. Actually though as much a novelty CV as Rococo, the Eight-stone would excel whenas systematizing Track Two CVs, as one of just a few present nominees really belonging on that interface Track One/Track Two. The Stones block, period, and never disappear, as players move them and move pieces. Playground tactics. Why not? Did Aikin test them on still larger boards? If Stones were to number one only, is not that approximately the Black Ghost of 1997 uncaught and uncapturable instead? Stones are like multiple Ghosts of indifferent colour. Like the Shirley MacLaine-Sellers oldie, Stones and Black Ghost tell of ''Being There,'' or having been, as in ''been there done that.'' The way to place Eight-Stone is ask, how much more research is warranted? For NextChess, hard-to-classify Eight-Stone belongs right there with Black Ghost, Betza's taking priority in the decremental ladder of imperfection. ''In 1772 a committee, of which Lavoisier was member, was appointed by the French Academy, to investigate a report that a stone had fallen from the sky at Luce, France. The falling of large stones from the sky, without any assignable cause of their previous ascent...'' --Fort, 'Book of the Damned' 1919
Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Wildebeest > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303 Big Board and set-up phase are interesting diversion and very possible long-term solution with new tactics. Would players hold a Queen, or a Pawn, for the final seventh-turn single drop? However, opening theory of standard Chesses Shatranj, Strong Queen, Xiangqi, Shogi and others constitutes half their literature and presumed appeal. Big Board pushes opening theory to unfamiliar set-up rather than play. What is your opinion at Big Board or any of the other ''setting-up CVs''? Reminiscent of Turkish Great Chesses, fixed line-up Wildebeest has rotational symmetry and no mirror symmetry in unusual type of array for CVs. http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/wildebeest.html Wildebeest is Knight + Camel, commonplace within 'ECV'. Otherwise conventionally developed, it's a good embodiment having logical Pawn three-step option. Bishops are simply adjacent, assuring their opposite colours. Eleven-wide is also unusual. Wildebeest is a regular big form with somewhat more attention deserved than the dark horses descending from Black Ghost. http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/bifurcation.htm
About to substantiate beside the others in arbitrary order of their having been named a year ago are: Fantasy Grand, Venator, Great Shatranj, King's Court, Three-Player (Zubrin), Schoolbook, Melee, and Sissa. Then also one each from Aronson, Fourriere, Gifford, Gilman, and John Smith, plus Fischer Random Chess. Please name one of your own here, with or without justification, for guaranteed inclusion as a #28, #29, or #30.
Joe Joyce wrote on Tue, Dec 22, 2009 07:23 AM UTC:I think I could recommend Gary Gifford's Time Travel chess as an excellent example of 'what if' chess. Every one of us has wanted to make different moves in the same game, and this variant lets us do that. Given the criterion of a simple, unique change that's easy to understand and shows something of the extent of chess variants, I think this game of Gary's just might fit. As for placement games, they have their good points. Modern FIDE chess is a speed game, with every piece pre-placed so that 1 move can bring it into contact with the other side. As a wargame, it narrows conflict down to the one decisive point of the war, starting just before the 'moment of truth'. This eliminates many aspects of warfare, some of them important but dreary, like logistics, some of them important but slow, like the marching and counter-marching before the battle as the armies jockey for position. Even the deployment of the troops is taken care of in FIDE before the game starts. Big Board Chess brings the deployment back. That's an interesting touch and provides a different experience, as the players now have 2 games to play, deployment and combat. That's something I've looked at in some of my own games, although not necessarily successfully, goChess being a good example of a less than successful game. In those successful games, what I do is offer pieces that are very short range compared to the board size. Chieftain is the obvious one. The pieces need a few turns to come into contact, and since the games are multi-movers, you can re-arrange a significant portion of your army in a few turns. This advance to contact feature is obvious in the large multi-move chieftain variants, but it also operates, although much less obviously, in the game to be evaluated here, Great Shatranj. I think you would find some evidence of the need to deploy and advance to battle in any game which, like shatranj, allows the possibility of totally separate battles occurring at the same time in 2 different board areas. Slower pieces add a more strategic character to the game, as you must decide in advance what to send to each area of the board before knowing what the enemy will have available to oppose you when you get there. It's a chess game of a different flavor.
Non-tedious big-board drop variants. I have invented 3 big-board drop variants in which tediousness is avoided, I think. Pawns and rooks are already positioned, which speeds up the dropping process. But a pawn can be *relocated* by dropping a piece on it. This means that the pawn chain is not defined at the outset. Mammoth Chess (8x10): http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/mammothb.htm Mammoth Chess: http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/mammoth.htm Scandinavian Chess: http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/scandinavian.htm Mats
Thanks Joe, I'll study your comment, and that therefore Time Travel is automatically #28. Preliminarily I have had Gifford's Indistinquishable Chess, so he may end up with two. That's because ones of Aronson, Fourriere, Gifford, Gilman, and J. Smith are not finalized yet -- in their case the inventor is only nominated.
Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan. Betza says CDA is THE Next Chess, and differing forces do indeed have a place now at the table of the Chess cafes. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=614 Fantasy Grand is the most significant development modelled on Chess Different Armies. http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/fantasygrandchess.html Both make different armies out of differing piece-types, where each army has even-balanced total power. Any CV played has its first move unbalance, so CDA and FG are just logical steps, an argument might run. Other CVs have made different starting arrays the two sides out of the very same pieces. That off-center deployment of forces even rarely may be necessitated by unusual board itself lacking any symmetry. Rather than pieces, how about rules being different but equal? (For ideas, see Betza's http://www.chessvariants.org/other.dir/manyrules.html.) Say Black gets one Pawn three-step prohibited White, or Black gets one double move prohibited White. Imbalances and asymmetry, like overcomplexity versus simplicity in rules, have relative lack of aesthetic appeal. Think Ockham's Razor. The CV genre of different forces and rules for the two opposite teams, however equalised, just seems to start from a hole and a handicap of their own making for acceptance among the classiest Next Chesses. Now Fantasy Grand is on normal 10x10, like CDA is on the old-fashioned smallish 8x8 Betza preferred. Fantasy Grand has some inventive combinations, that Paulowich comments on, strong Soldier Pawns of the Dwarves, the Giant Army's Giant being Alibaba and Behemoth Rider like Jetan's Dwar... Betza's Black Ghost is a different army too in the sense that only black gets the Ghost. Place the Fantasy Grand Armies' project of Elves, Dwarves, Evil Horde, Giants and Druids right ahead to purpose of the Black Ghost. (Black Ghost sounds like ''Ralph Gnohmon,'' his nom de plume.) http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
George, may I ask where you derive your rankings for Next Chess? If you are using number of comments with approval as I expect, I suggest that you include the exact numbers.
Not paying attention to the past ratings, I use the substance of individuals I respect like Betza, Jeremy Good, and many others. My reasons are in each new comment adding one more nominated CV. For example, at least trying to re-skim all comments plus re-read text, I just used Paulowich to summarize Fantasy Grand, because it is less familiar. Most of them someone like Joyce or Gilman already analysed in comments besides myself. Make up your own mind, John, to what degree you agree with the hierarchy or recommend a change in the order so far up or down a notch. Scroll back the 7 threads of NextChess. The major distinction to draw is Next Chess CV versus novelty CV, Track One and Track Two. Now I am starting to wrestle in my mind with bifurcators, which look awfully good, because next up is Venator. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303 The summary tomorrow will include not just Venator, but all several dozen bifurcators. Anyone also can please nominate a #29 and a #30. There are commercial and other sites emerging that will be interested in results like this ongoing long-term project ranking by comparison, not impulse. I did not plan this latest format. It happened to start 10 days ago for dealing with the 21 core NextChesses with this comment: http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24569 The 21 finished nominees had been sitting there for over a year.
The last nominations giving the 21 CVs, starting out on equal footing, were back at NextChess3 21.November.2008 with Schoolbook, Melee, and Sissa. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=21682 Before commencing exact rankings only last week, there were to be three new nominees. So now the three new ones counted towards NextChess finals are Bilateral Chess (Fourriere), Transactional Chess (Aronson), and Fischer Random (Fischer). To those 24 are yet to be one each officially from Gifford, Gilman, & John Smith. Anyone can still fill in #s 28, 29, 30, no more than 30 to be slotted under scrutiny and with justification into NextChess standings. http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
{Mastodon = *Bifurcators including Venator*} > Unicorn Great > Big Board >
Centennial > Eurasian > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand > Black Ghost >
Eight-Stone > Templar > Modern > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan.
Venator is one of two dozen bifurcators from DoubleCannon to Thraex, that
begin diagonal then turn 45 degrees to orthogonal, or vice versa.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/bifurcation.htm
The change of direction from first leg to second leg is always by 45
degrees. Implementations have been on 68-square board of Swedish King Gustav III and 8x10, as the DoubleCannon here:
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/doublecannonb.htm
Bifurcators require another piece, or the board edge, along their pathway
to validate any move or capture. Differing modalities require jumping the
screen on either the first leg or the second leg, bouncing off a screen 135 degrees behind, or colliding head-on 180 degrees for the necessary
45-degree change of direction to the second leg. For any individual
bifurcation piece-type, the capturing under all the different conditions
above may be by displacement, or by withdrawal, or by version of en
passant. In general, player has to think twofold for any given bifurcator:
how the piece moves and how the piece captures. That is no more complicated than the way you think Pawn moves one way and captures another way. Bifurcators including Venator get the nod here as they fit well on preferred minimalist 80 squares. Also so many bifurcators can be varied to keep audiences ahead of the curve to opening theory. Comments will be scrutinized to help break the ties.Score: Bifurcators including Venator > Great Shatranj > Mastodon > Unicorn
Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand >
Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Modern > Templar > Courier de la Dama >
Switching > Seirawan.
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
Mastodon is de-coupled from Bifurcators and in turn
Great Shatranj edges Mastodon. Also Modern moved up a notch for its supporting material passing Templar.
It is appealing to keep the Rooks of mediaeval Shatranj, as in Great
Shatranj R. At least 8x10 is proving practically necessary in NextChesses
for reasons from computers to completeness. Betza pre-described the atoms
Wazir, Ferz, Dabbabah, Alfil, Knight in
http://www.chessvariants.org/dpieces.dir/diffknights.html, all of which gain expression in Great Shatranj. Think of the pieces of
G.S.R. not the piece-types. That helps because, except for Rooks, eight
pieces are of comparable mobility and value.
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSgreatshatranjm
Now five of the ten pieces are from standard Shatranj and standard old-style strong-Queen 64-square: Rook, Rook, Knight, Knight, King. Therefore, we are looking at just five new guys remaining, and two of those exist as a pair of Alfil-Ferz Elephants (who is
1/2 the Mastodon, or Pasha, elsewhere). Then the only three single unknowns left: one, a singular Courier Chess Man, being same-moving as King from the other mediaeval game, so as to achieve fuller synthesis here. The final two are nothing but one each stand-alone, rarely-used tri-compound of Knight-Wazir-Dabbabah and of Knight-Ferz-Alfil, both of Betza device. Does it seem odd to have so many as three embodying (Alfil + Ferz) in whole or part? No, because they make up for no Bishops, and they get counterbalance from subtle Pawns' themselves forwardness within due stress on quite moderate movers and resultant non-trivialization of Pawns. There is the general expectation that future temperaments instead will likely gravitate towards rambunctious long-range knock-about hooked movers, crooked groovers, spooked rovers... Which a Great Shatranj wholly sorely lacks. Who knows or can definitely pre-judge? These NextChesses are dissected and reviewed broadmindedly for variable futures. In the event, it takes contrasting
Great Shatranj to Mastodon's even further considered elementalism as
perfection and Bifurcators' inevitable dynamism for the current standings' exact
slotting-in above.
One of the reasons I don't play Chess very much is that it is often less a contest of skill and more a contest of learning, favoring those who have studied Chess more. I'm a skilled player, but I have not studied openings or past games, and I am normally at a disadvantage against someone who has. What I appreciate about Chess is that it is largely a contest of skill, but the depths to which people can master Chess further by studying its past makes it less of a contest of skill. What I like about Chess variants is that, being largely uncharted territory, it remains primarily a contest of skill. Because of this, the matter of whether Chess will be succeeded by another variant is a moot point for me. If Chess is succeeded, its successor will eventually find itself in the same place as Chess, having an extensive literature and opening theory that will allow people to gain in mastery of the game without gaining in skill. Since the main problem I have with Chess is that it holds this position, putting another game in the same position isn't going to solve anything for me. For one thing, the literature and opening theory for Chess would still exist. People would still be mastering Chess by studying its past. Even if the literature of Chess was eventually forgotten in time, being replaced by the literature for the new game, it's highly unlikely to happen in my lifetime. Unless I live much longer than the average person or travel far into the future with a time machine, there is no chance of restoring Chess as purely a game of skill in my lifetime. But even if this could happen, the price is that some other game takes on the same burden as Chess, no longer being a contest of skill alone. So I choose not to worry about whether there will be a Next Chess. Like the planet Jupiter, whose immense gravity helps shield us from comets, the immense popularity of Chess helps shield Chess variants from carrying the same burden that Chess carries. I appreciate that Chess variants are not as popular as Chess, because that helps them remain contests of skill rather than contests of memorization. Still, I don't think I need to worry about other games gaining the same popularity as Chess. There will always remain more Chess variants that remain less popular, and widespread interest in a new Chess variant would benefit from a period of time when the game remained relatively uncharted territory. I can understand the appeal this would have, though I think my interest will remain with Chess variants in general rather than with the Jupiter-like game whose popularity keeps the other games fresh and novel.
Score: Bifurcators including Venator > Great Shatranj > Mastodon > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Kings Court > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Modern > Templar > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan.
http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/contest/kings-court.html King's
Court adds two paired short-range movers with genuine-enough, compelling
interconnectivity, the Jester and Chancellor, though effectiveness may be partially lessened on 8x12, the same size as Courier de la Dama. King's
Flight is specialized escape only from the Chancellor, and standard
Castling is free. Jester is like a Jetan piece of the same method, and Chancellor is Queen limited to two spaces.
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
Already added to the 21 CVs are Bilateral, Transactional, and Fischer Random for 24 NextChesses.
Score: Bifurcators including Venator > Great Shatranj > Mastodon >
Three Player > Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > Kings
Court > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Modern >
Templar > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan.
http://www.chessvariants.org/multiplayer.dir/three_player/three_player_chess.html
In 'ECV' (1994) back to the 19th Century and in Gilman's recent opus are
many four-player CVs. Before that conceptual leap, to be considered is
three-player model like Three Player(Zubrin). The board is hexagonal but the spaces
are 96 quadrilaterals. ''The superiority of any given player may be
counteracted to a degree by the concerted efforts of, or alliance between,
the other two players.'' Negotiating skill at a premium, the order of
movement goes White, then Red, then Black; and in the end player must beat
both others. Allies of convenience, however temporary, are forbidden
private conversation; contrariwise, understandings may be so tacit or implicit as to
remain silent. You can leave King en prise, counting on ally or other's
self-interest to perform as promised or expected, because King must be
captured for your actually being checkmated. If thus eliminated, a player's
leftover pieces remain capturable but never move again. Instead, a
variant permits takeover of forces by whoever captures a King. The
psychology involved is a natural idea whose time may eventually come.
Score: Bifurcators including Venator > Great Shatranj > Mastodon > Three
Player > (#5)Unicorn Great > Big Board > Centennial > Eurasian > (#9)Schoolbook >
(#10)Kings Court > Wildebeest > Fantasy Grand > Black Ghost > Eight-Stone > Modern > Templar > Courier de la Dama > Switching > Seirawan.
The Internet and Next Chesses represent this orderly
evolution. The cons are reviewed here:
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/listcomments.php?subjectid=FatallyFlawedM/C
The pros of Carrera compounds RN and BN on 8x10, of which Schoolbook is
representative, include: (1) long-time popularity of
Carrera-Bird-Capablanca on 8x10 and 10x10; (2) their logic and immediate
grasp as atoms Knight, Bishop, and Rook in combination; (3) excluding
promotion to RN or BN, that end-games often practically reduce familiarly
to plain old strong-Queen on 8x10. Pint-size 8x8 as vagary versus full 8-10 end-games can show subtly different outcomes with the same piece mixes.
Assuming Champion(RN)s and Centaur(BN)s are captured early, standand
end-games of (K+P) versus (K), or (K+N+N) versus (K+B+P), etc., are worthwhile
comparing between the two size boards, despite 8x8's ongoing burgeoning
obsolescence. The closer to the end, the somewhat more likely the 16 fewer
squares are to become the critical determining factor. Keeping as far as
possible the general orientation of any 6 or fewer pieces for an
illustrative end-game study, White may win on one size, Black on the other, or vice versa, in even conflicting results imaginable (though infrequent), from case to case on different paired size boards. The Carrera-Bird-Capablanca-Schoolbook deep 400-year eternal renewal helps fix these shifts and shadings as out of the original authentic over-all Caissan gestalt. As a starter CV easy to learn, Schoolbook for ranking above, one of the about ten important initial arrays of groundbreaking Carrera, is not so inventive as Eurasian, more playable than Wildebeest, and safer than Fantasy Grand. There it is now pointedly slotted with continuing high precision.
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=24303
Just a suggestion, George: could you put the name of the latest addition in the list in boldface so it's easier to see where youve ranked it? The list is getting pretty long and increasingly difficult to locate things in.
22 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.