[ 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 J Andrew LipscombLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier Chess Jester. 4-player variant with two new pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on 2004-07-03 UTCPoor ★I can't comment particularly on the quality of the game (not having played it), but ya gotta wonder about inventors who think a Camel (which its Jester is) is the equal of a Rook... Imperial Chess. Large variant with new pieces and victory by capture of royal pieces. (12x12, Cells: 144) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on 2004-06-15 UTCGood ★★★★One source of confusion in the terminology. Normally, the term 'royal' in chess variants is used to indicate those pieces that form the victory conditions. Perhaps the non-decisive royals in this game should be demoted to merely noble ranks. Pocket Mutation Chess. Take one of your pieces off the board, maybe change it, keep it in reserve, and drop it on the board later. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on 2004-06-09 UTCGood ★★★★As far as using different piece sets: the 'eccentric' sets of a lot of variants would be bad choices, but I could see applying these rules to Grand Chess (the Nightrider power seems more workable on the 10x10) or to Chu Shogi with Schmittberger's hierarchy (a piece taken out of the promotion zone would promote either to anything in the next category up, or to its own natural promoted form). 3 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.