The Classified Encyclopedia of Chess Variants

Ratings and Comments for:
Augmented Chess

The following are readers' comments and ratings for the page Augmented Chess.

Date Rating Comment

26 Mar 2002 None The second entry below's header ought to have read Black (TQ).
PBA

26 Mar 2002 Excellent I recently finished a PBeM game of this variant with Tony Quintanilla (which I won't post due to embarassing turn 18 mate by a RNA supported by a BD <g>), and found this a very exciting game.
As we all know, a Pawn is only as strong as the hand that holds it, and Tony usually beats me at games that fairly closely resemble usual Chess. But I found this game particularly interesting as I was sure I had picked a stronger team than his:

White (PBA)

Queen: RfbNFA

Rook: RfbN

Bishop: BW

Knight: NF

White (PBA)

Queen: RNA

Rook: RF

Bishop: BD

Knight: NW

Now Tony's Knight is color-changing, and his Bishop is color-bound, but with all of that power on the board, it didn't seem to matter. I suspose if the game had lasted longer and we had gotten down to fewer pieces, it might. As it was, it felt like playing in a minefield (which, IMHO opinion, is a good thing).
PBA

2 Aug 2001 Excellent This is very nice, but I find myself wondering about the army selection process. I can see several possibilities:

Each player writes down their section secretly, and the selections are simultaneously revealed;

White makes their selections, announces them to black, then black selects;

White makes one of their choices, then black chooses a piece, then white, etc. until both players have chosen their Queen, Rook, Bishop and Knight;

White selects their Queen, then black selects a Queen, then white selects their Rook, then black selects a Rook, then white selects their Bishop, then black selects a Bishop, then white selects their Knight, then black selects a Knight;

Like about, but in order Knight, Bishop, Rook, Queen.

Clearly all of the above would work reasonably well, but is there a prefered way to select the armies?
PBA

Date	Rating	Comment
26 Mar 2002	None	The second entry below's header ought to have read Black (TQ). PBA
26 Mar 2002	Excellent	I recently finished a PBeM game of this variant with Tony Quintanilla (which I won't post due to embarassing turn 18 mate by a RNA supported by a BD <g>), and found this a very exciting game. As we all know, a Pawn is only as strong as the hand that holds it, and Tony usually beats me at games that fairly closely resemble usual Chess. But I found this game particularly interesting as I was sure I had picked a stronger team than his: White (PBA) Queen: RfbNFA Rook: RfbN Bishop: BW Knight: NF White (PBA) Queen: RNA Rook: RF Bishop: BD Knight: NW Now Tony's Knight is color-changing, and his Bishop is color-bound, but with all of that power on the board, it didn't seem to matter. I suspose if the game had lasted longer and we had gotten down to fewer pieces, it might. As it was, it felt like playing in a minefield (which, IMHO opinion, is a good thing). PBA
2 Aug 2001	Excellent	This is very nice, but I find myself wondering about the army selection process. I can see several possibilities: Each player writes down their section secretly, and the selections are simultaneously revealed; White makes their selections, announces them to black, then black selects; White makes one of their choices, then black chooses a piece, then white, etc. until both players have chosen their Queen, Rook, Bishop and Knight; White selects their Queen, then black selects a Queen, then white selects their Rook, then black selects a Rook, then white selects their Bishop, then black selects a Bishop, then white selects their Knight, then black selects a Knight; Like about, but in order Knight, Bishop, Rook, Queen. Clearly all of the above would work reasonably well, but is there a prefered way to select the armies? PBA

Last modified: Monday, December 22, 2008

Ratings and Comments for:Augmented Chess

Ratings and Comments for:
Augmented Chess