User Name: Password:
New User Registration
Moderator: WhisperzQ , Mort , Bwild 
 Chess variants (8x8)

including Amazon, Anti, Atomic, Berolina, Corner, Crazy Screen, Cylinder, Dark, Extinction, Fischer Random, Fortress, Horde, Knight Relay, Legan, Loop, Maharajah, Screen, Three Checks

For posting:
- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu)
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)

Community Announcements:
- Nasmichael is helping to co-ordinate the Fischer Random Chess Email Chess (FRCEC) Club and can set up quad or trio games if you send him a PM here.


Messages per page:
List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn.
Mode: Everyone can post
Search in posts:  

<< <   25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   > >>
4. February 2007, 01:34:54
coan.net 
Subject: Re:
emmett: From the rules: "....(it is not adjacent to any other piece in any direction)"

It says "ANY" other piece, so it seems enemy pieces count also.

4. February 2007, 01:36:36
goodbyebking 
Subject: Re:
BIG BAD WOLF: True. Well, I just learned something new again. I've been learning as I play with this great variation. Now I have to check to see if I've actually won any Ice games yet.

5. February 2007, 11:05:20
WhisperzQ 
Subject: Re: Horde Chess/double step
dresali: Yes, although this is the only site I know of that allows the double move from the second rank for pawns starting on either rank ... although I think this is slight advantage to black I think white is still way in front.

9. February 2007, 16:31:57
joshi tm 
Subject: Cheversi on a 10x10 or 10x8 board.
Modified by joshi tm (11. February 2007, 11:09:59)
Does anyone feel for this? Of course add the Chancellor and the ArchBishop in both cases. Game last 10 turns. And how about adding http://www.chessvariants.org/diffobjective.dir/knightmate.html Knightmating Chess?

13. February 2007, 22:59:37
whirlybabe 
Subject: Re: Shortest Dice Chess game?
Not the shortest but very frustrating!

The Rook Shuffle

14. February 2007, 15:29:55
nabla 
Subject: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by nabla (14. February 2007, 15:30:24)
Although the rules used here are a copy/paste of the version originally posted by the inventor Robert Huber on the chessvariants.com website, I think that Recycle Chess should be played with normal promotion, for the two following reasons :

- Robert Huber has changed his mind inbetween, and all games I have played with him, plus all (numerous) games he played in the circle of german bughouse players were played with normal promotions. Me and him have even designed a (flawed) endgame study which was based on promotion. The only goal of the original rule was to use a single box of pieces, which is of course irrelevant when playing online.

- When the game is played without promotion, it becomes very hard to win endgames, because the pawns become quite useless. For instance, the defender king can head for the 7th and 8th ranks where no pawn drop can molest him any more. This is likely to become a real problem when the general skill level will increase, because in this game it is much harder to win by a direct mating attack than in Loop Chess, both because traded pieces disappear forever and because the king can escape by taking his own pieces.

When I asked Fencer if he could reestablish the promotion rule, he told me that he did not want to make the change for the moment and that the matter should be discussed here first, because :

- He doesn't like to make rules change after the game was published.

- He played some live Recycle Chess with Bobes, who said that promotions were problematic, because they allowed a player to multiply queens too quickly by playing the queen on the eight rank, dropping a pawn on the seventh, capturing the queen with the pawn, dropping another pawn on the seventh, and so on. While this observation certainly makes sense, I don't think that it overweighs the draw danger. And if a player has enough time to set up such a repetitive manoeuvre, he can probably win in other ways too.

So, Recycle Chess players, what do you think about it ?

14. February 2007, 15:45:35
AbigailII 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: Yes, I think that pawns should be able to promote, but I also agree that they can become too powerful because of the ability of dropping them on the seventh row.

Perhaps some compromise rule can work. Pawns can only promote if they either weren't dropped, or dropped on the first four rows. If a pawn dropped on the fifth, six or seventh row reaches the eight, it disappears. You would then need a way to distingish between such pawns.

14. February 2007, 15:57:47
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
AbigailII: In that case it would probably be enough to bar pawn drops to the seventh rank (drops to the sixth are much less dangerous), like it is done in some local variants of Bughouse Chess.
But consider that in Loop Chess pawns can be dropped on the seventh and then promoted, and that nobody seems to complain about it.

14. February 2007, 16:49:56
AbigailII 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: I don't think you can compare Recycle Chess and Loop Chess in that way. It's much easier to get a bunch of pawns in hand in Recycle Chess than it is in Loop Chess.

14. February 2007, 18:26:12
goodbyebking 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by goodbyebking (14. February 2007, 18:26:50)
nabla: Maybe we should consider have pawn drops, but only return them to an original pawn starting position (i.e. the 2nd row)... They would be able to be promoted after dropped, of course.

14. February 2007, 20:43:25
mangue 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla:even if I did manage to draw there : Recycle Chess (mangue vs. nabla) I admit it is drawish and I would find the game much more attractive with promotions.

15. February 2007, 13:02:20
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by nabla (15. February 2007, 13:03:12)
AbigailII: Yes it is easier to get pawns in hands, as far as you are not concerned with making holes in your position, that your opponent can take advantage of. I have experimented with the Rxa7xb7xc7 opening (yes that is a bit naive) and that was a disaster. In the opening and middlegame, I don't think one gets more pawns in hand than in Loop Chess.
Now when we talk about the endgame, you are right that it is easier to get pawns in hand. But this is a tactical element which can be taken into account by the players. It makes pawns more valuable pieces that they are in normal chess. You may like it or not, but it is not a fundamental flaw, like the impossibility to win "won" games would be.

15. February 2007, 13:10:13
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
emmett: I don't think that we need to be so restrictive, as your proposal would make pawns in hand completely uninteresting. If pawn drops are limited to ranks 2 to 6, they are already of controlled danger, but even that restriction does not seem necessary to me. Don't forget that when you capture one of your own pawns, you are generally "wasting" a move and weakening your position, in compensation for the new pawn you get in hand.

One could discuss forever about how everyone would like the rules to be. But I don't see why Fencer should implement anything else than either the original rules (which he did), either the actual rules as corrected by the inventor (which have been thoroughly playtested by german players).

15. February 2007, 13:12:12
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
mangue: You mean "even if I didn't manage to draw" .
Yes, I had a huge material advantage in this endgame, but it was probably still a draw.

15. February 2007, 16:46:28
AbigailII 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: An alternative rule could be is "if a promoted piece is captured by a friendly force, it becomes a pawn again". That would prevent Queen cloning.

16. February 2007, 02:36:18
Peón Libre 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: I agree completely that the choice is between the original rules and Robert Huber's revision. It would be inappropriate for us here at BrainKing to patch together a hastily concocted hodgepodge of fiddly litte rules and try to pass the result off as Mr. Huber's work. That sort of thing would only lead to confusion and the tarnishing of an interesting variant.

I support adopting the revised rules. I have not yet played Recycle Chess, partly because I just haven't got around to it, but also because the original rule (where a pawn's reward for bravely crossing the board is cruel annihilation) is simply ugly.

Of course it would have to be made clear whether a promoted pawn, upon being recycled, retains its promoted status (as in BK's Loop Chess) or reverts to pawnhood (as in Bughouse and Crazyhouse).

16. February 2007, 20:40:11
goodbyebking 
Subject: this game is not a draw, help!
This game of Ice Age Chess is not a draw, right? After move 60, it says it was a draw.

16. February 2007, 20:44:49
coan.net 
Subject: Re: this game is not a draw, help!
emmett: Looks like a bug to me - Black should win. (Let fencer know)

16. February 2007, 20:45:53
goodbyebking 
Subject: Re: this game is not a draw, help!
BIG BAD WOLF: It's nice to hear that. Thanks.

16. February 2007, 22:20:05
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
AbigailII, KotDB: Yes, that should be made clear and now that you rightly pointed that out, I realize that I am not sure about the author's intention in that case. I will ask him by e-mail.

17. February 2007, 13:30:23
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by nabla (17. February 2007, 13:31:41)
AbigailII, KotDB: OK, Robert Huber told me that they always played with promoted pieces reverting to pawns once they were taken. I hope that we will agree on this rule.
It avoids the "queen factory" trick, but sets a little problem : in order for the interface to be completely "Brainking-compliant", all info should be displayed on the board, so that the promoted pieces should be somehow marked. Although it is almost always quite easy to remember what pieces were promoted.

17. February 2007, 13:52:58
AbigailII 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: Perhaps you find it quite easy to remember, and it probably would if you are playing in real time, but I doubt I would be able to remember that when the game progesses with one move per week, and I play 10 games.

17. February 2007, 18:02:04
nabla 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by nabla (17. February 2007, 18:02:26)
AbigailII: You have a point here. It would be preferrable to have marked promoted pieces, although without it the game would still be more playable than say, Cloning Backgammon without marked "race" checkers :-)

20. February 2007, 02:34:20
Peón Libre 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
nabla: Yes, that's probably the best rule.

As far as I'm concerned the interface issue is secondary. It should be very easy to create the necessary additional piece images (e.g. take the current images and add a little red dot or something). And even without the extra images, all the information would still be there in the game history; players would just have to be careful to pay attention in certain situations.

But the most important thing is to get the rules right. Now that we know what the correct rule is, the BK implementation should be corrected as soon as possible.

20. February 2007, 02:44:54
Walter Montego 
Subject: Re: Promotion in Recycle Chess
Modified by Walter Montego (20. February 2007, 02:46:41)
KotDB: In Shogi the promoted pieces revert back to their unpromoted shelves when captured. While promoted they're marked with a circle around the unpromoted symbol. This is if you use the Roman letter marked pieces as I do to play. If you use the Kanji marked pieces they're red colored when promoted and the promoted piece has a different name.
Either method would seem to work for this variant you're talking about, though just using a red dot on the promoted piece would seem like a real easy thing to do. Especially if the captured piece is going to revert back to a Pawn and the player might have a choice of captures to make.

26. February 2007, 07:40:01
ScorpionOct64 
Subject: challenge chess
Modified by ScorpionOct64 (26. February 2007, 08:01:00)
hi all...my son and I played chess today and tried different ideas..one was to remove the Queens and Rooks I found it interesting and harder to play I wonder if such a game was on BK we could get more Knight & Bishop practice...id like your ideas on that ty

Mike

26. February 2007, 10:46:01
joshi tm 
Subject: Re: challenge chess
ScorpionOct64: Or, instead of a queen a Janus (or Arch Bishop) piece an instead of Rooks one extra Bishop and Knight. Also, why not having Knightmating Chess?

26. February 2007, 21:00:46
ScorpionOct64 
Subject: Re: challenge chess
Modified by ScorpionOct64 (26. February 2007, 21:01:45)
joshi tm: good idea...Knightmating? is that when you have a knight in the kings position and 2 kings where the Knights were?

Mike

26. February 2007, 22:18:18
joshi tm 
Subject: Re: challenge chess
ScorpionOct64: Yup, I meant that one, where you have to mate the opponent's Knight.

5. March 2007, 22:15:43
mezzanine 
Subject: Ice Age Chess New Tactics!
All fans of Ice Age chess have a look at this position of my current game:
_

Ice Age Chess (mezzanine vs. megaadam)

White moves and wins.
_

Note that to achieve the above position I saced Q for N.

Conclusion: In Ice-Age chess advanced pawn's and knight's are of more value than bishops, and when close to an Ice-Age even of more value than rook's and queen's. ;)

5. March 2007, 22:48:53
andreas 
Subject: Re: Ice Age Chess New Tactics!
mezzanine: Certainly, piece values in Ice Age Chess are completely different from that in chess. Pawns and knights are considerably more valuable. Rooks and bishops are about the same value.

I think piece values are something like:
* bishop: 2 pawns
* rook: 2 pawns
* knight: 4 pawns
* queen: 5 pawns

26. April 2007, 19:19:03
nabla 
Subject: Prize tournament
Modified by nabla (26. April 2007, 19:24:11)

12. May 2007, 08:56:24
goodbyebking 
Subject: Recycle Chess
I like Recycle Chess. If you do, then join a team in your fellowship, or even better, take on a captainship of a Recycle Chess team. "Le" Club would like to challenge any team in this varient, but there is no one to challenge!

Great game - Let's promote it!

18. May 2007, 09:14:10
goodbyebking 
Subject: Recycle Chess
.
.
.
.

Send a message to all team members
No teams to challenge were found.


Would any fellowship like to get a Recycle Chess team going and challenge "Le" Club to a team match?

19. May 2007, 04:13:34
wetware 
Subject: Game Invitations

I'm interested in playing/testing a couple of variants that aren't available at BK: Compromise Chess and Move-and-a-Half Chess.


We could play Compromise Chess here by means of unrated games of standard Chess, coupled with the use of BK messages for "compromising".  Checks and piece movement are as in normal chess, except that:
--Whenever only one legal move is possible, it is to be made without any "compromising"
--Otherwise, the player to move must propose two legal candidate moves; the opponent then chooses which of these two moves shall actually be played
--A pawn possibly promoting to a different piece should be considered a different move candidate (for example, in a position where e7-e8 is legal, e8=Q and e8=R could be put forward as a legal pair of candidate moves)
--Win by making a move that produces a standard chess mating position, or by proposing a pair of legal moves--both of which are standard mates.


Move-and-a-Half Chess would have to be played via BK messages or email, as no variant here would allow us to mimic move sequences.  (A computer-supported version of this variant would be ideal, because of the additional move accounting requirements.)


Move-and-a-Half Chess    [rules and remarks from The Chess Variant Pages]
--Each turn, each player gets enough gas to make 1.5 moves.
--Each turn, each player must make at least one move.
--If you only make one move, you get credit for half a move.
--Each turn, each player may make as many moves as he can afford.
--Check must be respected, and your first move of a turn must get you out of check.
--The very first turn of the game, White gets only enough gas for one move.
--[not stated on the Pages, but I presume that if a player makes a sequence of moves, only the last of them can be a checking move, as in rules for progressive chess variants]


Remarks on Move-and-a-Half Chess
--This could be the best game of all.  [the author may only have been speaking about Doublemove variants--wetware]
--The primary strategic tension here is between saving and spending. If you save up enough gas to make ten moves in one turn, surely you can checkmate; but in the meantime, your opponent might be able to win by making a few extra moves here, a few there.
--How embarassing it would be to get checkmated with 8 moves in the bank!
--I think that the average game will be 20 moves or fewer.


If we play Move-and-a-Half Chess, I'd suggest mentioning your accumulated move total with every move (sequence) made.


I'd be happy to play 4-6 games with both of these variants, at any one time.  And 3-5 days per move max, please.


Message me if you're interested.  I've played Compromise Chess, but never heard of Move-and-a-Half Chess until today.


19. May 2007, 11:52:25
mangue 
compromising looks similar to ambigous, but closer to chess.

I am more seduced by one-and-half, maybe we could add that black start with +0.5 for compensation. What do you think? And of course if it is implemented, it must be implemented as a fully playable version with move sequences (as we have move sequences for backgammon, too)

19. May 2007, 12:50:44
mangue 
http://www.chessvariants.org/multimove.dir/marseill.html Marseillais
is something nabla would like to have too !

19. May 2007, 16:05:24
wetware 
Subject: Re:
mangue: Move-and-a-Half Chess sounds very promising to me. I'd love to playtest it first, to see whether the bonus values that I mentioned give a good balance between White and Black wins. If it generates good complex play and yields about 50/50 results, I could see asking for it to be supported here.
It reminds me of Three Checks Chess, with its wonderful imbalances between force+development vs. the number of checks delivered. Plus it could have some great mating threats and sequences like those seen in Progressive Chess.

19. May 2007, 18:44:27
wetware 
Subject: Dice Chess rules questions

  1. Is castling allowed on a roll of 4 or 6 (assuming neither the king nor the rook has moved)?

  2. Is promotion to a second king allowed?

20. May 2007, 13:31:38
joshi tm 
Subject: Re: Dice Chess rules questions
Modified by joshi tm (20. May 2007, 13:32:45)
wetware:

Short:

1: On a 6

2: No. (It would be incredibly cool indeed)

20. May 2007, 15:12:33
nabla 
Subject: Re:
wetware: I agree that Compromise Chess is a should-be-here variant, but there are at least two possible checkmate rules and II am not sure which one is better. Although your ruleset makes perfect sense, the take-the-king variant also does, that is, if you have only one way to get out of check, you have lost the game. When you are not in check and have only one legal move, it should probably be counted as stalemate.

Move-and-a-half chess is an interesting idea, that I didn't hear about before. Probably only play-testing can tell whether games will not always be n times a single move, followed by a big series which leads to checkmate.

mangue : Yes, I would love to see multi-move variants here. They are well suited for turn-based play because the games are usually short. Marseillais is good, but my personal preference goes to Double-Move Chess (the take-the-king equivalent).

20. May 2007, 16:52:12
mangue 
Subject: Re:
nabla: As I read on chessvariants.com, you are a fellow organiser of marseillais chess... but well, I get bughouse is more sexy this millenium

20. May 2007, 17:34:01
wetware 
Subject: Compromise Chess Rule Options

nabla: For Compromise Chess, I had never heard of your "forced move ends the game" rule option, until you mentioned it.  I would still prefer the "forced moves must be played without compromise" option, for two reasons: (1) it was what the game's inventor specified, and (2) my admitted personal bias in favor of endgames, and the way endgame theory changes in specific variants.  I'm afraid that in the "forced move ends the game" version of Compromise, very few endgames would ever be reached--we would virtually lose an entire phase of the game, for no good reason that I am able to see.


20. May 2007, 19:18:09
nabla 
Subject: Re: Compromise Chess Rule Options
wetware: As for (1), what I read in the Encyclopedia of Chess Variants is that Fred Galvin issued two games in 1958, Refusal Chess and Compromise Chess. Compromise Chess is played with the rules you stated, and Refusal Chess is designed as the over-the-board version, where you have to play one of your two moves over the board, and the opponent can reject it if he wants. It is virtually the same game, but for a reason I don't know in Refusal Chess Galvin decided for the take-the-king version.

Now, I am not saying that one rule is better than the other. I generally prefer take-the-king rules, but in this case it is not a real take-the-king rule, because if it was, the mated opponent could refuse the move which takes the king, so a double check would be needed to win the game (duh!).
Regarding endgames, I don't think that it should not make a big difference (but I share your bias!)

mangue : Where did you read that ? That must be a typo :-)

20. May 2007, 20:22:51
mangue 
Subject: Re: Compromise Chess Rule Options

21. May 2007, 01:58:01
wetware 
Subject: Compromise Chess Endings
nabla: It looks to me as though nothing short of K+Q vs K would be sufficient to force mate in the Compromise variant; K+N+B, K+B+B, even K+R (surprisingly?) can't get the job done.

K+P vs K endings are different, too. The "winning" side needs to have at least 2 pawns (and those must be on different files) to force a win.

Sorry to get so deep into the weeds here, but I find this stuff fascinating. :)

15. June 2007, 07:42:00
goodbyebking 
"Le" Club has the only active Recycle Chess team in a fellowship.

.

If you belong in a fellowship, I would sure appreciate it if you could get a Recycle Chess team going so that we can have another team to play........... :)

1. July 2007, 16:07:55
Undertaker. 

13. July 2007, 23:24:47
AbigailII 
Subject: Behemoth Chess
In Behemoth Chess, it's entire possible to win the game in the first move (I did so in my second game). No other game on Brainking can be won without a timeout or resignment on the first game. However, that also means the game isn't counted for ones BKR. Probably because the game finishes before the third move.

Is this intended? Or just a side-effect of how current implementation?

14. July 2007, 17:42:53
Fencer 
Subject: Re: Behemoth Chess
AbigailII: A side effect.

<< <   25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34   > >>
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved.
Back to the top