Comments by DavidHowe

Ok, it's here. The general comments page. Have at it!!

We might also mention Realm Chess. I'm still trying to find Betza's
Pinwheel Chess on our site, but so far have been unsuccessful. Perhaps we
need to add it?

I've heard vague rumours that this game, or a game very much like it, is
still played at Miskatonic University...

The excellent rating applies to presentation and originality. I have not
playtested this game (yet). Truth be told, I'm not sure I *want* to! :)

I have an idea for self-captured pieces: a self-captured piece cannot be
dropped to a square which is threatened by a friendly piece. This should
alleviate the use of self-captured pieces to checkmate or block checks.

It would be nice to have a full, comprehensive article on Chess
Handicapping. Anyone out there want to volunteer?

'Pawns reaching their 8th rank are promoted to any non-Royal piece that was
on the board at the start of the game.'

Perhaps the answer is obvious, but I'll ask the question anyways: when a
pawn is promoted, is there any limitation on the orientation of the
promoted piece? I would assume that the promoted piece can be in any
orientation that is legal for that piece (eg. a pawn promoted to a Feeble
Rook could not be oriented at 45 degrees), but the rules aren't explicit.

Requiring the piece to be oriented 'North' would make safe promotion a bit
more difficult, but might be more interesting.

Hmmmm... I never really considered Progressive Feeble Chess. But now that
you mention it, it seems as if such a game would work quite well. Perhaps
it would even play better than regular progressive chess. 

In my opinion, progressive chess progresses a bit too quickly, so perhaps
*gradual* progressive feeble chess would be more to my liking. Gradual
progressive uses a progression that grows more slowly: instead of 1 2 3 4
5... it uses 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5... A bit harder to keep track
of, but perhaps it tones down the game a little bit. I'd try it with the
Italian progressive rules.

A 5x5 version would be possible, although I think it might start getting
cramped at that point. Honestly, I chose Los Alamos mostly out of
laziness.

I have finished the Zillions implementation for Weakest Chess. Zillions
plays it quite badly (even at 3 minutes per move), so this implementation
is probably only good for experimenting or over-the-net play with another
human.

I think Ralph has (perhaps unintentionally) invented a game that lies in
the region between FIDE chess and Go. That is, the game tree for Weakest is
less broad but lengthier than chess, but more broad and shallower (I
imagine) than Go. It is similar to Go in that many small changes acrete
over time to form either winning or losing patterns. As with Go, computers
would have a difficult time playing the game well (as Zillions has).

It is my suspicion that Go players would like Weakest Chess very much.
Chess disc pieces with markers on each side to indicate capturing and
non-capturing could be used as an 'over-the-board' way of playing this
game. I encourage people to try this game out. I believe it has great
potential.

Here's the rule from our FIDE laws page
(http://www.chessvariants.com/fidelaws.html):

10.10
The game is drawn, upon a claim by the player having the move, when the
same position, for the third time: 
(a) is about to appear, if he first writes the move on his scoresheet and
declares to the arbiter his intention of making this move; or 
(b) has just appeared, the same player having the move each time. 
The position is considered the same if pieces of the same kind and colour
occupy the same squares, and if all the possible moves of all the pieces
are the same, including the rights to castle [at some future time] or to
capture a pawn 'en passant'.

If this game already exists, I can't find it. Sounds like it would work
well as each player would have to balance guarding the enemy king vs.
attacking the enemy pieces. I propose we call it Royal Hostage chess.

Here's another, similar idea:

Royal Hero chess

Standard setup.
The first player to do any of the following, wins:

1. Checkmate the opposing King, or
2. Make a move that takes his King out of check
3. Bare his opponent's King

Kings may move into check.
Kings cannot be captured, but may capture.

I have implemented a very crude membership system for chessvariants.com. You
can now become a member of this site. I have also changed the commenting
system to be able to utilize member information. Stay tuned as we continue
to develop this capability and add member functions to various areas of the
site. Feedback is welcome and keep in mind -- this is a work in
progress...

You all make very good points. But I should point out that Gothic Chess
also uses Chancellor. Perhaps we should indicate that the preferred name
is Marshal(l), but Chancellor is also commonly used.

Another point: should we have reserved names for certain pieces? Should we
try to enforce the use of the names 'Marshal(l)' and 'Chancellor'
exclusively for the Knight-Rook?

Proposal: Establish a Chess Variants Standards and Guidelines Committee

Purpose: To publish guidelines and standards relating to the development
and playing of chess variations. Guidelines would be used by the chess
variant community to help reduce confusion and inconsitency. Enforcement
of such guidelines would be voluntary.

Membership: Obvious choices would be: Hans Bodlaender, David Pritchard,
Ralph Betza (just to keep things interesting), John William Brown, Fergus
Duniho, Glenn Overby, Michael Howe, Peter Aronson. Membership would be
non-paying.

Hosting: The Chess Variant Pages would host the committee and act as a
public forum for committee deliberations and for posting of any committee
publications.

Positions: 

President: Responsible for choosing which issues get decided when
Secretary: Responsible for writing and posting committee publications
Treasurer: Unnecessary?

In the case of a tie, the entry that received the most votes from the
editors will be selected. If there is a still a tie, then the entry that
received the most votes from the chief editors will be selected. If there
is still a tie, then both/all of the tied entries will be selected.

Doublechess will also appear in the next RV poll:

'Doublechess is one of the most popular CVs which
can be played on Richard's Play By Email server. No other CV inventor
has done more to supply sample games of his invention to your
site than I have. I have been running Doublechess tournaments
on Richard's PBM server almost since the day it was added.
Take a look at the current published Doublechess Standings to
see how many people have played it and how often they have played it.
Doublechess' beauty lies in its simplicity. It contains no special
pieces. Lay two standard chess boards side by side to create a
16 by 8 board. Use two chess sets and replace the second set of
kings with a third set of queens. Lay the first army in the center
and the second army out in the wings. Doublechess games are rich
with tactics and have the 'feel' of orthodox chess.' -- David Short.

The (under review) guy was just some text to indicate that the comment was
under review. I have since removed this text so it will just show up blank
until the comment is reviewed. Stay tuned -- I'll probably be making
small changes here and there as people get comfortable with the
semi-moderated system.

I dropped the ball on that one. We have $25 from the entrance fees, and
I'll pony up another $75. That makes $100 in prize money. Mike Howe, the
1st place winner will receive $70, John Lawson, the second place winner
will receive $30. Both will receive award certificates.

I apologize for dropping the ball on this. Hopefully my lack of action on
this issue won't discourage others from joining in on other tournaments.

Hi Paul,

I would think the book is fairly valuable. I would be willing to pay on
the order of $200 for it, but you may be able to get much more than that
depending on the book's condition.