[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Earliest Ratings and CommentsEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩ Test Page. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]David Howe wrote on 2002-03-30 UTCGood ★★★★New commenting system created! David Howe wrote on 2002-03-31 UTCGood ★★★★Just testing with another comment. The new commenting system allows comments with or without <b>HTML</b> tags.<hr>--DH Archoniclastic Chess. Pieces are augmented on squares of their color. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Anonymous wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCNew comment system indeed. Regulator Chess. Game on a 35 square board with a 7 square track on which a piece moves that determines how Knights and Bishops can move. (6x7, Cells: 42) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Anonymous wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCExcellent ★★★★★excellent! Test Page. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]John Lawson wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCIn what way is the new comment system an improvement over the old comment system? Will we have two comment systems to refer to, one current and the other ageing? I wouldn't know an HTML tag if it was marked down at WalMart. gnohmon wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCRating: Undecided. Do you test with the browser called lynx? www.lynx.browser.org The old comment system streamed all text, so I had to enter comments with html tags so at least they would look good when I viewed them with lynx. If this comment is one paragraph, I still will need to, with a few extra step which isn't all that bad. gnohmon wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCRating: okay so far. Okay, I can do without html tags. For emphasis, there's time-honored *usenet* format. I don't like that the comment stuff is only at the end. Top & bottom was better. You want to *encourage* comments/feebback. I am considered fairly clever. However, it was only a lucky guess that led me to the idea that one must first preview and then submit. Either you should include a submit (for the confident) or change the button to read John Lawson wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCWell, hey, if I can format my comments without HTML tags (whatever those are), then I may be happy. Let's see. I am NOT considered fairly clever, except at my very narrow professional specialization, which 99.44% of the readers here will never have heard of, even though I approach 30 years as a computer professional. -JCL John Lawson wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCI'm with gnohmon on the desirability of providing feedback buttons at top and bottom. I like that the most current feedback is shown; you know if there is an interesting conversation going on without having to open another page. David Howe wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCOk, so far I see two suggestions: 1. Provide a feedback link also at the top of each page. 2. Provide a submit button on the feedback form which skips the preview page. <p>I will work on making it more obvious that one must submit from the preview page. I really think it's a good idea for people to preview their comments before posting them. <p>I will restore the feedback link at the top of each page. I agree that we want to encourage feedback whenever possible. <p>Thanks for the feedback on the feedback system! Peter Aronson wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCOne more idea (isn't there always?) -- it would be nice to have some places to hang both general comments and comments on the comment system off of. So, I'd like there to be a page for the comment system <i>itself</i>, on which comments could be made, and a sort of general comment root page or site page or something for making comments not specifically associated with any particular page, like the discussion currently going on in the comment track for <u>Archoniclastic Chess</u>. David Howe wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCFor now, please avoid using double quotes. I will be working on fixing the problem 'real soon now'. David Howe wrote on 2002-04-01 UTCI've jury-rigged it so that double quotes are replaced with single quotes. Who's idea was it anyway to revamp the commenting system!?! :) This is a double quote believe it or not! --> ' Grid Chess. Always move to a different 2 by 2 square part of the board. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on 2002-04-02 UTCPoor ★The comment system says 'skip to comments' but there are no comments. This game should not be described without mentioning U-Grid Chess, and also Betza's Pinwheel Chess (and Orbital Rotating Grid and so forth). David Howe wrote on 2002-04-02 UTCWe 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? Archoniclastic Chess. Pieces are augmented on squares of their color. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]JCL wrote on 2002-03-31 UTCNote that any CV whose rules are lost would serve as Thespis Chess. --JCL gnohmon wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC<HR>I really ought to sieze the publishing delay as an opportunity to rewrite and improve the text of Ghastly Chess, on the principle that a sick wind blows poorly.<P> For Mikado, there is already List Chess, my 1977 name for 'many rule sets in one game'. One could also have Fan Chess, in which every piece carries a fan; instead of moving, the player can have one piece deploy its fan, which makes it immobile and ancapturable. It would take two turns to close the fan, and the first turn would leave the piece immobile but capturable. Stalemate loses, of course.<P> The Mikado is all about teaching the chorus to use the fan a certain way.<P> Any game with a Jester would serve for the Yeomen, and for the subtitled Iolanthe, any form of Fairy Chess does the trick.<P> Trial by Jury, though, wrecks everything. Bummer.<P> Would 'Chess and Verdi' work better? No, I thought not.<P> Puccini gives us Mimi Chess, where the Q gradually becomes weaker and ultimately expires. So, there's hope.<P> Basingstoke, indeed. <P>-- <BR>gnohmon<P><HR> JCL wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC'would perhaps come close to being almost nearly playable' Almost . . . Well, if instead of each rank and file being different, if the board were divided into maybe three zones in each dimension (left, center, right; back, center, forward; etc.), then this might be actually manageable by a normal human. And on the other topic, once youopen the door to Gilbert and Sullivan chess, logic dictates all sorts of generalizations (Aristophanes chess, Tolstoi chess, Rowling chess, ad...ad...I dunno) --JCL PBA wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC'would perhaps come close to being almost nearly playable' Almost . . . <p> <br> Reading the last several comments as an editor, I can not help but to suggest I see an article here (OK, I could help it, but I won't). If we can have <u>Chess and Physics</u> (and we do), why not <u>Chess and Gilbert and Sullivan</u>? (Of course, Gnohmon could remark that I'm sitting on two his articles already, and why should he send anything else in until I publish them, which is fair enough, but editors have no shame). <p> PBA JCL wrote on 2002-03-30 UTCAs long as we are flogging this theme, how about Gondoliers Chess (two Kings, and no one knows which is the real one), Buttercup Chess (exchange King with random Pawn at start of game), Sorcerer Chess (each piece is attracted to randomly chosen other piece), Lord High Executioner Chess (must mate self before opponent, too drawish), Lysistrata Chess (Queen refuses to perform, whoops, wrong playwright), and...and ('Basingstoke, John') Aah yes, Basingstoke it is. --JCL Anonymous wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC<HR>In Basingstoke Chess, each turn after making a legal move a player may add one new rule (chosen from a pre-agreed list), or may say 'Basingstoke', which resets the rules to FIDE default.<P> This would be sort of like Progressive Chess, but in a meta manner of progressing.<P> <HR> Anonymous wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC<HR>What is the state of a bare king? Naked, of course.<P> Ask me something more difficult.<P> <HR> JCL wrote on 2002-03-30 UTCBy the way, Race Chess is kind of like Rollerball Chess, which was an entry into some contest or other, and is actually kind of neat. You realize that the regular annual contests would be much more boring if Hans were born on February 29? (Yes, I know. I pirated that idea.) --JCL JCL wrote on 2002-03-30 UTCThe very concept of Ruddigore Chess leads immediately to, 'What is the state of a bare King?' The mind boggles, at least my mind does. --JCL gnohmon wrote on 2002-03-30 UTC<HR>Too many new ideas here to reply to, so I'll addd some new spices to the pot instead.<P> In Race Chess, both players have the same 'forward' direction. (No relation to _The Forward_, which is down on East Broadway by Canal Street.)<P> In Ruddigore Chess, I suppose you must make one capture per N moves or else one of your own pieces succumbs to the curse. Of course, if a man can't capture his own pieces then whose pieces can he capture? For the final touch, make it a shogi/chessgi variant with drops (there's a gi in ruddigore, just backwards). <P>Would 'Forward Chess' be the name of the feebback variant where more advanced pieces are stronger? (No relation to -- O, I said that.)<P> Ruddigore: one capture per move or else; captured pieces become reserves; you can capture your own; if you fail to make a capture you must choose one of your own which perishes -- gone from the game, not in reserve. Notice that when you place a reserve it is not a capture, therefore some other piece perishes.<P> Ruddigore Chess has not been playtested.<P> Left-right increments combined with rank increments suggest a game where each piece can have 64 different possible movement patterns depending on which square it occupies. If these were extremely regular, and therefore the player had some chance of remembering, the game would perhaps come close to being almost nearly playable.<P> Chatter is good.<P>-- <BR>gnohmon<P><HR> 25 comments displayedEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later⇧ Latest⇩Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.