[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Game Reviews by Daniil FrolovLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier Robber-Baron. Which of the seven robbers is the robber-baron? (7x7, Cells: 39) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2020-02-24 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I have to comment it for having simple yet original rules, promising a good entertainment, perhaps even well commercially-sold. 3-Player Chess I. Missing description (10x10, Cells: 75) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2014-09-12 UTCGood ★★★★A nice way to play 3-player game on rectangular board (a bit artifical, but still; I mean, artifical as invented to play on rectangular board, while as itself, topologically, it's quite natural). Also there is a good unusual choice of pieces, interesting special for this board. And a cube rule have special feeling at 3-player game. "This draught, with promotion, is taken from the version of draughts I grew up with; I am aware that it is different from the better known one played hereabouts" - interestingly, where are you from? Chaturanga. The first known variant of chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2014-02-16 UTCExcellent ★★★★★After modern European Chess and Chinese Xiang-Qi, Chaturanga with 2;2 elephants and Shatranj looks odd. In European Chess there are logical and worthy pieces. In Xiang-Qi there are resonable and harmonical positions of pieces, though elephants and ferzes are even weaker. In comparision with these games, at first sight Chaturanga looks clumsy, with very random pieces, with elephants, chaotically dangling in 8 squares each. But actually, after a few tries to play this game, you'll see some harmony in it... Xiang Hex. Missing description (9x7, Cells: 79) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2014-02-10 UTCGood ★★★★I also would suggest heavily-orthogonal variant: elephants moves as non-leaping dababahs (able to enter the river, but not cross it), and advisors moves as wazirs, and general still have only orthogonal moves. But i love, how it plays with standart diagonal moves as well. Al-Ces. Variant on 10 by 10 board with 30 pieces per player. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2014-01-20 UTCGood ★★★★I like this kind of gold and silver generals. I guess, they have this way of movement to bring feeling of Shogi to game without drops. They have high non-capturing mobility (approximating to mobility of Shogi's pieces in-hand), but player must choose positions carefully for best use of their gold and silver directions.However, i would not allow them to make "flying" move, once they attacked by opponent (generals in shogi can't flee such easily). Chess-Battle. War variant from the Soviet-Union, 1933. (12x12, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2013-12-28 UTCGood ★★★★A little behindhand addition to the discussion of the headuarters capturing capabilities. Joe Joyce made quite logical assumption that headquarters was able to capture. But there is a following question: what are it's capturing limitations? I also heard opinion that headquarters was not able to capture, because in this case it's supposed that it can capture any piece, but Yurgelevich tried to make this game as realistic as possible for chess-like game, and commander can't be "Rambo with bazooka". My own assumption: headquarters can capture with same limitations as infantry (can't capture the tank). But in this case another question follows: does it capture only in same directions as soldiers, and can it make double move on white squares? Since rule about double step is said only about infantry, while about headquarters it's only said that it can move as king, it's logical that it can move as king only. But on the other hand - double step rule probably implied that some places in real live (especially in war conditions) have more practicable paths or better transport connection than the others. So, why headquarters can't use same ways, if this game is that realistic? Tic-Tac-check. Get four chesspieces in a row on a 4 by 4 board. (4x4, Cells: 16) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2013-04-08 UTCGood ★★★★1. I bet, the game's goal is to put all your pieces in a row (wich logically comes from the game's name)? 2. If two pieces are captured, is dropping the only legal move, or rule that at least three pieces must be dropped appliles only for initial placement? Patricia. On a 5 by 5 board, with drops and changing pieces. (5x5, Cells: 25) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-09-24 UTCGood ★★★★Looks very interesting. I made preset, who want to try? /play/pbm/play.php?game%3DPatricia%26settings%3DPatricia AltOrth Hex Chess. Hexagonal variant using pieces moving only one way along each orthogonal. (11x11, Cells: 91) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-09-12 UTCGood ★★★★I did not played it yet, but idea is very interesting! I was thining of hexagonal game with similar pieces, good that i have read this page before posting it! It's certainly much more logical than Wellisch chess and it's good place for pawns from Glinsky chess. It's alternative variant of 'standart' hexagonal pieces. The only advantage of McCooey chess is that bishops are colorbound and knights are colorswitching. The only thing that i can't understand: Korean elephant (zebra) analogue is sennight. If i'm right, sennights are knights from Glinsky-McCooey chess. Zebra analogue should have only half of sennight's moves, while other half is camel analogue. And full sennight is, of course, bison analogue. On this diagram i marked zebra analogue's moves with 'z' and camel analogue's moves with 'c': ________________ ___/ . \___ ________________ ____________ ___/ . \___/ . \___ ____________ ________ ___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___ ________ ____ ___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___ ____ ___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___ / . \___/ . \___/ c \___/ c \___/ . \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ z \___/ . \___/ z \___/ . \___/ / . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ / . \___/ z \___/ . \___/ . \___/ z \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ . \___/ x \___/ . \___/ . \___/ / . \___/ c \___/ . \___/ . \___/ c \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ / . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ c \___/ . \___/ c \___/ . \___/ / . \___/ . \___/ z \___/ z \___/ . \___/ . \ \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ ____\___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/____ ________\___/ . \___/ . \___/ . \___/________ ____________\___/ . \___/ . \___/____________ ________________\___/ . \___/________________ ____________________\___/____________________ Am i right or not? Neo Chess. Four player chess on 8 by 10 board from 1925. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-08-28 UTCGood ★★★★Can be played on standart board without queens (pawns are still able to promote to queens). Penturanga. Chaturanga on a board with 46 pentagonal cells. (8x5, Cells: 46) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-08-26 UTCGood ★★★★Actually, representation is everything. For example, look at my game 'Square and hex on same board' - http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSsquareandhexon or at this (zzo38) A. Black's comment about 1-dimensional games - http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=25177 But i'm going to post another petagonal variant now, wich is more different from hexagonal variants, each 'square' have 5 orthogonally-adjecent 'squares'. Mini HexChess. Small hexagonal chess variant. (Cells: 37) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-08-16 UTCGood ★★★★I don't like hexagonal variants, but this one was fun to play. Chaturanga. The first known variant of chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-07-28 UTCBelowAverage ★★This page describes chturanga rules as if somewhere was official documents, that states that 'in 7th century chess was played for 100% sure in this way...' and describes these rules. I think, page must state that exact rules of first form of chess are unknown and mentoin some alternative rules, wich also could be in the first chess. Maybe, it's ok that it did'nt mentoided other possible rules of promotion, stalemate, bare king, king's special knight's leap, but it's horrible that it did'nt mentoided another possible elephant's move: silver general's move, 1 square diagonally or 1 forward (elephant's 4 legs and trunk)!! All other souces tells that no one knows, wich move came first! And the earliest game with silver general, described on CV pages is makruk, as if this move was invented in Thailand! While CV pages is probbably one of main source for these, who want to know more about history of rules of chess (most of encyclopedias don't mentoin anything further than 'first form of chess was played by four players and with dice')! N-Relay Chess. Uncapturable Knights give other pieces the ability to move as Knights. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-06-24 UTCGood ★★★★Interesting subvariant: pieces, attacked by opponent's knight also can move as knight. By the way, why there is no en-passant? Unachess. Start with empty board and begin with dropping pieces. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-06-23 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I played similar variant, but with 2 differences: 1. Kings must be dropped on first moves. 2. Pawns may be dropped anywhere, expect 1st and 8th ranks. Another variant, i can suggest (i did not played it yet): Pawns have same defination of forward. This one may be played with 3 players. Actually, with any number of players, from 2 to 16. For multiplayer variant, rules for capturing/mating king and pieces of lost player must be chosen before playing, many variants are possible. War of the Worlds. Chess army from planet Earth against the Martian forces of Jetan. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-06-20 UTCGood ★★★★Interesting, what about playing with one of 'human' armies against another human army? Of course, Turkish army will win most of games, but what about others? Hafts. A denser Draughts, but with pieces only capturing those bound to the opposite colour. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-06-19 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Oops! I'm sorry! I have read rules not carefully at first time: in my variant each player had draughts only on 1 color. Your variant, where each player have draughts on both colors is playable, i played it! And, i think, this idea must be developed: if chess variants are not very popular, checkers variants (take-me checkers, for example) are popular. By the way, how about allowing to capture sideways (like in Turkish/Armenian orthogonal checkers)? Dual Direction Variants. Adding extra moves to pieces in historic forms of Chess.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-04-17 UTCGood ★★★★I like this idea. I can see one problem in Xiang-qi variant: tank can capture queen on first turn without being captured on next. Also, i don't like that in Xiang-qi there is jumping wildbeest: what the problem with non-jumping variant of it? Non-jumping camel move must be 2 steps orthogonally and when 1 diagonally outward. Interesting, that if play chess in this way, game will start with 5 queens. There is another idea: instead of being compound with piece of corresponding direction, original pieces simply changes to these corresponding pieces. Or each piece changes after each move in this way: rook (knight) - bishop (camel) - queen (wildbeest) or only rook (knight) - bishop (camel). Or, after each move all pieces changes (in one of same orders). 18 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.