Game Reviews by avunjahei

I try to rate it, but it didn't work...

Worst game ever!!!!

Yes,the idea is good, but i guess, Burroughs was a bad chess player. It's just not possible to avoid a draw! The fliers will just get traded (better were the odwars of the "earlier" game) - this game is a flaw. At least with this rules it's just not playable.

Innovative choice of pieces. Theoretically they fit well with each other. But game play turnsout to be rather awkward.

Looks nice, but doesn't work well. Every game I played was like the other.

What a game!

I didn't know that it is possible to create a game using pieces that are credibly EVIL. That's not just a game, it's a piece of art.

I'm not convinced though, that it is playable "by mere mortals" without minor changes. The most problematic piece is the Ghast. It's presence restricts the possible opening play for the second player to a few playable variations.

If you happen to hear strange voices when trying this game, don't bother! Thats normal...

I hate to say it, but this is a children's game. Alas, it's flawn. It will end in a draw when both players are moderately skillful.

Works very well.

Still one of the best solutions for a large board. The set of pieces is quite conservative, but that may be the reason why it works. They consist merely of the most logical extensions of the classical set. The set is well balanced. There are more leapers than sliders, but that's good for the board at first is a bit crowdy. The foxes in front of the pawns are placed very well. They effectively close the game, hindering advancement of pieces. Whithout them opening play wouldn't work nicely.

The game mimics well the proceedings of a real life battle, much better than Classical Chess and even better than Shatranj. This feature is geneally one of the pleasant things when playing large chess variants

One of my favorite large board games. Playing it gives a kind of breathy feeling, if that makes sense. Like on a wide open field; your limbs seem elongated...it's like playing chess on Pandora... In a way.

Doesn't work. The dabbabante exerts too much pressure on the 2th/9th rank.

Fixed.

Ultima is a puzzling game in more than one sense. It seems to violate all rules for game invention. Even its inventor called it a flaw and his reasons are all pretty true. yet it is one of the most successful chesslike games, and its also one of my favorites.

First point, he says, it lacks clarity. Of course it does. Playing it does not feel like playing chess at all, its more like solving a puzzle in every turn, so for every move you need much much time. Does that make it a bad game? No, it doesnt. Its exactly what we like on it.

The other big point is, that it favors the defender. And so it does. This should lead to draws, at least at a high level of competition. But thats okay. Draughts and Morris are even more drawish, yet they are not bad games. If following an interesting fight it does not matter that much if it finally leads to a draw. 

Maybe it is even the lack of clarity that makes the game playable despite the strong defending power of its pieces.

I cant see that it is bad to advance your pieces rather than stay at home. The more space youve got the more mobility you have. And what is the biggest advantage of that? To be able to bring your immobilizer in a strong position.

That may be the only ugly thing of this game: that the immobilizer is too important. As far as my experience goes, he is the central piece in every successful attack. Immobilize the king and capture it with the chameleon. I rarely succeeded in winning in any other way.

But yet not ugly enough yo reduce my rating.

Daniel is probably not the first to make a large board variant by just doubling the number of pieces. To have a whole cavalry of knights and to have bishops that can protect each other is a very interesting feature. I also like that he 1. didn t double the queen and 2. has the double step of the pawns retained in every position, though forgetting that twice caused me to lose the only game I played untill now.

For my taste there are, maybe, too many rooks on the board. I even would try out to boldly replace two of them with yet another pair of knights. Then the number of each sort of pieces on the board would reversely correspond to their value: 6 knights, 4 bishops, 2 rooks, 1 queen. Could be a stupid idea, though.

That was quick! Thanks!

 Great game!

Objectively there is too much power for such a - relatively - small board, but it is nice - though difficult - to play. The Unicorn is not easy to handle, but it is a very elegant piece.

I played just one game and I think it's very good. It is a logical and well balanced combination of pieces and gameplay is interesting. Games do not have to be original. Games have do be designed for getting played, that's all.

Inferior to Hadean Chess. The Flying pieces fit better into the game with more restricted movements. In this ensemble they kinda "swallow up" the rooks and bishops, turning them into inferior pieces, for the flying pieces can do everything what they can do as well.

I played it again after long time and regret having given a bad rate to it. Formerly I didn't like that all games are attacks of both opponents on their right side while defending on their left side. Now trying it out again in fact I see no wrong with this predestined mutual races. Also the ensemble of pieces is well well chosen and work well together, like in all of Paulowitch's variants that I know. Although far inferior to FIDE chess it is a nice try.

I did not expect it from reading the rules, but after trying it I think it is one of the best games in the data base.