Game Reviews by GregoryStrong
Looking back, I noticed that I had not rated this game, so I now correct this oversight with an 'Excellent' rating for my personal favorite variant. I hope that Ralph re-emerges soon, because I am concerned that his inventions might become overlooked without his continued input. But I will continue to do what I can to promote CWDA, though, such as voting for it's inclusion in Game Courier tournaments, and providing the best possible CWDA support to ChessV, for analysis of different army match-ups. Sometime in the not-too-distant future I will provide a great deal of information here on what I have learned from computer analysis of the major CWDA armies. Regarding the Pawn promotion rule: I would recommend a change to this rule. The current rule says a pawn may promote to any piece in either army at the start of the game. Here's the problem: What about the match-up of Nutty Knights vs. Nutty Knights? Since no piece in that entire army may move backward faster than one square at a time, even if a pawn promotes to a (very powerful) Colonel, it still probably can't move back into the frey quickly enough, seriously decreasing the value of pawn promotion. I would suggest the alternate rule: A pawn may promote to any piece (other than Pawn or King) in the player's army at the start of the game, or in the standard Orthodox Chess army (Fabulous FIDEs). This always provides the option of promotion to Queen.
Very nice! The author has done an excellent job of defining a Fischer randomization system for Capablanca's Chess (actually this piece mix goes back to the 1600s with D. Pietro Carrera -- see Carrera's Chess.) It is obvious to me that the design has been carefully considered from both a game-designer's perspective and a software developer's perspective.
I'm not sure I like the idea of renaming the pieces, though. There are already too many different names for these pieces, and I think the goal should be to standardize the names, and I believe Capablanca's names of Archbishop and Chancellor are probably the best choices.
This is a very interesting game. I look forward to playing it in GCT #2.
Below is a list of mobility values for all the pieces in Pocket Mutation, as well as a few Chess-With-Different-Armies pieces at the bottom for comparison. The 'average mobility' column is a Betza Mobility Calculation with a magic number of 0.7. This is probably the best estimation of the value of the piece. The second column is the average number of checks this piece delivers on an empty board without being counter-attacked. The third column is the average number of different 'directions' in which this piece attacks. The fourth column is the average number of squares attacked on an empty board.
Average # Directions Attacked | Average Empty Board Mobility | ||||
Average Mobility | Average # Safe Checks | ||||
Class | Piece | ||||
Class 2 | |||||
Knight | 5.25 | 5.25 | 5.25 | 5.25 | |
Bishop | 5.93 | 5.69 | 3.06 | 8.75 | |
Class 3 | |||||
Rook | 8.1 | 10.5 | 3.5 | 14 | |
Nightrider | 7.96 | 9.5 | 5.25 | 9.5 | |
Super Bishop | 9.43 | 5.69 | 6.56 | 12.25 | |
Class 4 | |||||
Cardinal | 11.18 | 10.94 | 8.31 | 14 | |
Super Rook | 11.16 | 10.5 | 6.56 | 17.06 | |
Class 5 | |||||
Queen | 14.03 | 16.19 | 6.56 | 22.75 | |
Chancellor | 13.35 | 15.75 | 8.75 | 19.25 | |
Cardinal Rider | 13.89 | 15.19 | 8.31 | 18.25 | |
Super Cardinal | 14.68 | 10.94 | 11.81 | 17.5 | |
Class 6 | |||||
Chancellor Rider | 16.06 | 20 | 8.75 | 23.5 | |
Super Chancellor | 16.41 | 15.75 | 11.81 | 22.31 | |
Super Cardinal Rider | 17.39 | 15.19 | 11.81 | 21.75 | |
Class 7 | |||||
Amazon | 19.28 | 21.44 | 11.81 | 28 | |
Super Chancellor Rider | 19.12 | 20 | 11.81 | 26.56 | |
Class 8 | |||||
Amazon Rider | 21.99 | 25.69 | 11.81 | 32.25 | |
Misc | |||||
Fibnif | 5.69 | 2.63 | 5.69 | 5.69 | |
Waffle | 5.75 | 2.25 | 5.75 | 5.75 | |
Woody Rook | 6.5 | 3 | 6.5 | 6.5 | |
Charging Knight | 6.78 | 2.63 | 6.78 | 6.78 | |
Short Rook | 7.51 | 7.5 | 3.5 | 11 | |
FAD (colorbound) | 8.31 | 5.25 | 8.31 | 8.31 | |
Charging Rook | 8.48 | 7.88 | 5.03 | 12.91 | |
Half-Duck | 8.56 | 5.5 | 8.56 | 8.56 | |
Bede (colorbound) | 8.93 | 8.69 | 6.06 | 11.75 | |
Fourfer (FR4) | 10.57 | 7.5 | 6.56 | 14.06 | |
Colonel | 12.64 | 10.5 | 9.19 | 17.06 | |
N2R4 | 14.86 | 15.75 | 8.75 | 19.25 |
I had not noticed this page until George Duke's recent post. I like the alterations made here (at least in the first game.) I will add it to ChessV shortly, because it already supports Courier Chess, and this is an easy addition. I also like the 12x8 board, and suspect that it may be a great board for CVs that has not been adequately explored. As for the second game, I have not played a game with a crooked bishop, so I can't speak to playability. I can say, though, that I am not sure at all how to program such a piece into ChessV in any 'good' way. For what I mean by good ways vs. bad ways, I will need to get into some detail about ChessV architecture. I will start this (complex) discussion on the ChessV thread sometime in the future.
I haven't given a game a 'poor' rating yet, but I really can't give this game anything else. The first thing I think when I look at this is 'Isn't there ANYTHING about the game of Chess that was ok as-is?' He changed the number of files, the number of ranks; changed the move of the Rook, the Bishop, the Pawns (no enpassant) ... He re-arranged the pawns! He doubled the number of Queens!!! And then there's the barrier pawn, which might make center-play more interesting, but boy is it nothing like a 'normal' Chess piece. And no resigning?!? I won't even comment on that one. On the up-side, yes, he did add symmetry, but I just can't see giving it a 'good' rating. It just looks like an extreme over-reach that wasn't all that well thought-out. Of course, I must admit that I haven't played it (yet) ... It is possible that my opinion would improve.
I would like to second David's comments, particularly regarding the pawn promotion. You have created a new piece combining all moves which can only be attained by pawn promotion; I see little reason to offer under-promotion. You already have to have an Amazon piece in the set, so you shouldn't need the option to promote to weaker pieces for that reason. Also, the more promotion options you allow, the slower computer programs which play the game become. The more promotion options there are, the more legal moves there are, and the larger the search tree becomes.
I do think this game looks interesting, though. I like the starting array, especially the symmetry. I'll post a Game Courier invitation shortly, and give it a try...
This is, indeed, a very interesting game! I did just notice, however, another game with this name on George Jelliss' A Guide to Variant Chess site. The site indicates that this game was published in Variant Chess in 1991. I don't know if this is a problem or not, but I thought I would point it out.
Please understand, though, that I do not mean to diminish the creativity of this game in any way. The Jester is a particularly good innovation, and helps to diminish the value of opening books in a big way!
12 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.