Kibbitz Listing
Is it possible that the preset doesn't handle double check correctly? Could this also be a problem in other presets? Black could counter the Unicorn check or the Lion check, but not both at once as this requires a move of the Queen and he has none.
A most interesting game.
Value classes 7 & 8 are not essential to game play as they will so seldom
occur, but neither do they harm gameplay and they make the piece set
logically complete.
As for the SuperCardinal, it is the strongest vc5 piece in terms of
mobility calculated a la Betza, but is weaker than any vc6 piece. Look at
it this way. A Rook is one atom stronger than a Bishop: we add a 'super'
move to each and a SuperRook is one atom stronger than a SuperBishop
(perhaps the gap narrows a bit as the super move removes colorbinding for
the Bishop). Now if a Chancellor is one atom stronger than a Cardinal
adding the super move to each should likewise leave the SuperChancellor
one atom stronger than the SuperCardinal.
By the way, the SuperCardinal can push the King around quite nicely, but
the SuperChancellor can mate unassisted.
Thomas,
I believe your interpretation of the rules as written is the correct one,
since it can't be the inventors' intent to create a paradox and the
rules as written do so, as I myself pointed out. Therefor your move is
100% legal.
However, I would urge you to retract your move: The competant authority
has ruled it illegal, albeit incorrectly in our shared view. Said
competant authority is neither Peter nor David, but Fergus, who is in
charge of both Game Courier itself and this particular tournament, thus he
has the authority to make this determination. The fact that he made his
decision based on Peter's and David's is interesting but irrelevant to
the legal issue.
I have no experience in directing Chess/CV games but have extensive
experience as a club level Bridge director. The laws of both games (and
virtually all other games) are the same on this point--the director's
decision is to be followed, even when it is wrong.
You might indicate that your are retracting the move under protest and
inquire about what your appeal rights (if any) may be if you do not win
this game.
Roberto, you played a fine game and I'm rather surprised at the outcome
(though pleased!) Thank you ofr a good game.
In retrospect, the opening error proved decisive. The loss of two pawns
was made up, but his position became very cramped. Ironically in view of
our last game, Roberto might have done better allowing the exchange of my
Pushme-Pullyu for his Shield. It is an open question how much material
advantage I would have gained. My own belief is the it pays to trade a
Queen or PP for a Shield or Immobilizer if you have adequate offense
without the piece, but not if it leaves you on the defensive.
The game showed off the Archer and the technique of seting up spotters for
long shots. Also of note was a horrific threat from my Swapper, properly
countered--a mistake here would have ended the game then and there.
My hope is that these games will show Fugue as an excellent, deep game in
its own right--neither Ultima nor Rococco but a third thing with a beauty
and grace all its own.
Roberto is putting up a most impressive defense, especially for a variant
that is new for him. This is shaping up to be an excellent game. If I can
break through his strong defense I expect to win--if not, the Ultima Gods
help me when his counterattack comes.
This game shows the power of the Shield quite clearly. It's a vital piece
in the opening and middlegame, but not that useful in the endgame: King and
Shield can't mate lone King and loses vs. King and any non-shield
piece--sooner or later King and Shield have to separate or lose by triple
repetition. King and Immobilizer vs. King and Shield is a particularly
easy win as it doesn't require the King an Shield to separate--immobilize
them both and win by stalemate.
Yet averaged over the game, the Shield is almost as strong as the
Immobilizer--probably stronger in the opening.
Notice also how a purely defensive piece enhances attack. My Pushme-Pullyu
is exerting terrific pressure on Roberto's positon with impunity, as it is
uncapturable while next to the Shield.
OOPS, not check as Roberto's King is shileded. Still a good move picking off the pawn, though.
The rules description on the Game Courier page needs to be changed. It states that the Cavalier moves one space <i>forward</i> and then one diagonally. I played the game assuming this was the rule--my fault for not checking the full rules page which gives the Cavalier's move as one square <i>orthogonal</i> followed by one square diagonal.
Well played on both sides! Black's 13th move is the key--mutating the
Queen and allowing the fork but creating the devastating counterattack.
The most brilliant Pocket Mutation move I've seen.
If Black doesn't find this move, or there is any error in his followup,
White is playing more than well enough to win--he will promote the
Nightrider and continue to extend his advantage.
Congratutulations to Fergus for a fine win and to Thomas for a excellently
played effort that could have easily gone the other way.
I played this game wide open, disregarding my own advice about using the
pocket sparingly. If the attack hadn't come off, I would have been in a
disadvantaged position and might well have lost. Ben already had gained a
small material advantage and a failed attack would have given him the
opportunity to gain more.
You will probably never see an AmazonRider in Pocket Mutation, but in
games with a more conservative opening, a wider variety of pieces will
appear. Above Queen strength pieces are not common but do make appearances
from time to time. The good variety of Queen value pieces often come into
play in the later middlegame, but the real meat of Pcoket Mutation's
expanded piece set are the SuperBishop, NightRider, SuperRook, and
Cardinal.
Sometimes a timely mutation of a Knight into a Bishop or vice versa or the
promotion of Bishop to Rook is the key to a victory. This game has
tremendous variety.
Critical indeed. Tony is threatening to win by clearing the arena. His use of his superior number of pieces to keep my two Amazons out of the arena is quite instructive. If I can simplfy the position down to one Amazon for me in addition to Rook-Wizards and Rooks for both sides, I can probably win. If I can't, Tony will likely have a winning head start in the coming 'Rook War'.
Perhaps the problem is that spells may not be used to achive checkmate, but
may be used to escape checkmate. Two alternatives to playtest:
1. Checkmate may be given by spells.
2. Spells may not be used to escape checkmate. (Spells may be used to
escape a check which could have been escaped by a normal move.)
Very good game you two have going.
A rules point you should clarify before it becomes applicable: does
promoting a pawn induce flipping? I would say no, as the promotion is a
Pawn move, not a move of the resultant polypiece.
I made a bad mistake on move 8, but might well have escaped with a draw
against a lesser opponent.
Please observe Antoine's excellent technique in bringing the win home. I
found the wall of pawns around his Queen most annoying:he was to well
protected against a Knight drop that might have allowed me some
counterplay. His aggressive attacks on the back rank looking for
promotions kept my Queen pinned down defending it--this is really a
Rook's job.
An excellent exploitation of superior matierial and mobility for an
irresistable breakthrough. Well played indeed!
I like Fergus' thinking on this issue.
The final mating combination is Pocket Mutation at its finest. Got to love
the discovered checkmate. A fine illustration of the awesome power of the
Nightrider in the opning/early middlegame.
Antoine and Peter have done much to advance opening theory for Pocket
Mutation. I have come to appreciate how terrifying a Rook on its intial
square is--the Nightrider mutation is always lurking in the background.
Antoine is correct. Black's 16 move is illegal, as piece creation is not
optional in Wizard's War. Sorry about that, Tony (and your were asking me
about letting you know if you made an illegal move!)
As to whether kibbitzers should comment on illegal moves, I think we
should develop some consensus on this as soon as possible. I can see both
sides of this, but tend towrds being in favor of it--better to waste three
moves than a whole game.
Over the board chess is not a valid analogy, as kibbitzers there are
barred from any comment about anything.