Ratings & Comments

Daniel, do you realize that the site icon in the upper left-hand corner
takes you to the index page? I have visited regularly for years, so I have
the 'What's new?' page bookmarked. --JCL

Very nice game. It is highly playable. Very enjoyable. The double teams
interact in a cooperative way. The board is interesting to play on,
especially with the center squares which change your piece types.
   Although the game harkens back to Chaturanga, even the 4-player version
of Chaturanga, and other 4-player games, there is a lot on ingenuity here.
The idea of changing piece type in the center adds some of the ancient
flavor too. The double team environment in-itself adds a new element in
many ways.
   The rules are simple to grasp. Traditional chess moves are used, along
with the ancient moves in the center. The center, of course, alludes to the
traditional struggle in chess to capture the center.
The game is very nice. By that I mean that it is graceful and evocative.
   Nice game. Try it!

The idea is, it's grid chess, but each grid rotates 1/4 turn after each move; and alternate grids rotate backwards -- e.g. a1 goes to a2, and c2 goes to c1.

I wrote the program that displays the board and lets 2 people play, more than once, in different languages. Long lost, of course, even if you could find compilers/interpreters for those languages.

I have all the back issues, and some other stuff, packed in a box to send them away, but I never get around to doing it. So nag me.

Knight's Tour is just an over-the-top thingy all us CV designers like to do, and Brownian Motion is over-the-over-the-topmost.

--
gnohmon

I have no idea whether or not it's really playable, but judging purely by
the text, the number of ingredients in the recipes, and the quality and
amount of spices, I would have to guess that this is a very fine piece of
work.

Applause.

Peter, I've recently been playing Grand Camelot in another venue.  Grand
Camelot is a four-player version of Parker Brothers Camelot game.  (To the
peanut gallery: Yes, I know it's not a chess variant; let me finish.)  

Grand Camelot has two unusual features for a four-player game:
1 - Partners sit side by side.  Translating to this game, Red and Green
would be partners against Yellow and Black.
2 - The turn sequence is a 'figure-8'.  Translated to Chaturanga 4-84, that
would be Red - Yellow - Green - Black (repeat)

This small change works surprisingly well, and I've wondered if it would be
as successful in a 4-player CV like this.  I generally find 4-player
abstract strategy board games annoying, but Grand Camelot is lots of fun
and very exciting.

Also, the comment about the ZRF being double-dummy brought an idea to mind.
 Has there been a CV (e.g. Bridge Chess or Whist Chess) where the players
bid to achieve a certain outcome?  The partner of the 'declarer' sits out,
and the defenders play without communication.  This might be a possible
thing to design.  One could even play a Feeback version with ones
physician, attorney, and accountant.

I would like to announce that I am going to be running an Omegachess
tournament by email on Richard's Play By Email server at
http://www.gamerz.net/pbmserv
In order to play in the tournament you must have a PBM userid.
Check out http://www.gamerz.net/tutorial.html and
http://www.gamerz.net/commands.html 
if you are new and want to sign up for a free userid and password
on the server. You do not have to have ever played Omegachess before
on the server to compete in this tournament. If you would like to play
in the event please email me your PBM userid to [email protected]
I have not yet decided exactly how I am going to structure the Omega
tournament. It will probably be a round robin tournament, with between
4 to 8 games in the first round, and a certain number of players 
advancing to a second and final round.

I would also like to announce that I am also going to run a chess
tournament on PBM too. This is traditional orthodox chess!
This tournament is open to the first 25 players who email me to enter.
I will be creating five 5-man sections. Each player will play a total
of 4 games, 2 as white and 2 as black, one game against each of the
other players in the tournament. The 5 section winners will then
advance to a final 5-man section for the championship of the tournament.
In the event of a tie for first place in a section the first tiebreaker
is head-to-head result. In the event of a draw or a 3-way tie where
A beat B, B beat C and C beat A, all tied players advance to the finals
and a larger final section will be created. Again, to compete in this
tournament you must have a PBM userid. You may enter both tournaments
if you like. When emailing me please make sure to specify which
tournament you are entering. Thanks again and good luck!!

Just as a note from the author: Ed's variant of doing queen attacks does
work well, also. But don't get too trigger-happy- it's good defense. Make
sure you don't get blindsided by a bishop in the classic variant!

The major downside to the queen shot variant is that then you can't
reasonably use a bishop to move in for the kill; you pretty much have to
lose two pieces to the shotgun, unless you use knights well...

-- Adam Norberg (sgamer [att] swbell [dott] net )

This appears to be an excellent game, with a lot of thought and effort.

Is it a chess variant? Not really, even though it uses chess pieces. It's a
mathematical (topology) abstract game, and you might find many fans for it
in rec.games.abstract -- give it a try!

Many abstract mathematical games become popular and widely played, but the
market for them is not 'chess variant' people. 

I haven't tried Chain of Fools, but if it's as good as it looks you'd be
doing yourself a big favor by taking the game over to rec.games.abstract,
where you can find folks who will really appreciate it.

Author's note: I'd like to see this in Zillions.
--Adam Norberg

When Nemoroth finally appears, you will be amazed by the piece called the
Wounded Fiend, and the distant resemblance to the Tron Queen.

There must be something in the air that makes people come up with similar
ideas at nearly the same time.

I've heard vague rumours that this game, or a game very much like it, is
still played at Miskatonic University...

The excellent rating applies to presentation and originality. I have not
playtested this game (yet). Truth be told, I'm not sure I *want* to! :)

Apart from the paradox problem, the need to take into account temporary
powers makes assessment of overprotection a bit complicated. 

I would suggest ignoring temporary powers in assessing overprotection.

I thought this page was good becuase it gave you all the rules.  They wer
eeasy to understand and showed diagrams for furthur clarification

Wow!!  

Who said theme doesn't count in abstract games?  I want to play this, but I
think I'm going to be disapointed when the pieces remain silent.  I want to
see a ZRF, but not too soon.  Whoever does it needs to do a good job on the
graphics, not to mention audio, to do the game justice.

'What eldritch noise did I hear?'  Perhaps the screech of the El.

You have trapped me and won the game of game-making!

You suggested recursive, and I said 'sure, okay', and then you hoisteded me
with me own petard by pointing out a most ingenious paradox, more ingenious
than Doctors Einstein and Schweitzer. I am bereft, like an apprentice to
Pilate.

Where can I find an mp3 of busy editorial beavers whistling the 'Happy
Editor' song as they undo a previous change?

'Favors Black, you think? Then perhaps you will be willing to offer me
substantial odds as we play a game for some enormous stake of money, 
perhaps a penny on a1 doubled on each successive square?'

I had almost put the above statement into the story of getting a regular
chessplayer to play Chigorin Chess, somewhere after the part where 'variant
rhymes with deviant and that starts with d and rhymes with t and stands for
trouble.', and way after the part where the regular chessplayer says with a
sneer is that some kind of fairy chess.... (I'm not suggesting that
you're
the offensive non-PC 'regular chessplayer'; the misinformation
about relative values of N and B is part of general unwisdom, that's
all.)

Read any monograph on the Chigorin Defense. You'll find that many 
players now believe the N to be superior in the early stages of the game,
which agrees with my findings on the theory of chess values so I think
it must be right.

Given the advantage of the first move to go with the advantage of fast
development, the *white* side in Chigorin Chess probably has a large
advantage. In order to Castle K-side, Black needs to move two Pawns and two
Bishops; and one of those P moves looks suspiciously like a weakening
move.
White can go 5.O-O at the earliest, but Black can choose to go 3...O-O;
think about it!

And, of course, this is the whole point of Chigorin Chess! You can get a
'regular chessplayer' to play, because he will want to prove that the
Bishops are so much superior...

It recently occurred to me that I might have named the Zombie an Iron
Golem so that its dissolution by ichor would be a nethack reference.

But perhaps that would have been inappropriate after all. Lovecraft never
played a game of Nethack in his life.

Very interesting.

1. At first sight, the board seems unbalanced because a Black R at b6
attacks
both b2 and c2, but a WR b3 does not get its power doubled.

I would suggest that in the long run this advantage is much greater than
W's advantage of first move.

2. The Bf1 can't go to c4, right? Perhaps Bishops should be replaced by
something else. (Not zFF, that would increase Black's advantage.)

3. A Knightrider on a6 attacks both f2 and e2, right? And a Rose on h6
attacks both d3 and e3, and therefore... interesting.

gnohmon, you're wrong about a few things. first of all,
while black rooks can control double files if they are on the
a,b,g, or h files, a white rook on the b-file would control
both the a-file and b-file, and likewise a white rook on the 
g-file controls both the g-file and h-file. Download the ZRF
and you'll see. 

Bishops may seem weak but they may yet have a purpose in the game.
It may be true that their ability to penetrate the other side of
the board and attack is more difficult, but they'll still be
pretty good as stay-at-home defenders. Note however that white
bishops at a3 or h3 control very long diagonals (bishop at a3 
attacks e8, bishop at h3 attacks d8)

and while black may be able to control the outside files with
his rooks faster, white should be able to occupy the escalator
squares more quickly. In order that white does not get an overwhelming
advantage in the game, I gave black the first move. Time will tell
if the game is balanced sufficiently or not.


Incidentally, if anyone who has ZILLIONS OF GAMES would like to
play either SLANTED ESCALATOR CHESS, or SPINAL TAP CHESS

http://www.chessvariants.com/large.dir/spinal-tap-chess.html

or both, with me by email, drop me a line at [email protected]
We can email each other the notation and record and save our games
with ZILLIONS. 

What I really like about SLANTED ESCALATOR CHESS is that not only
is there interesting connectivity around the board, but that it's
going to be a bit challenging for each side to try to navigate the
board to get to the other side and get a good attack going. 
Should make things very interesting!

The trouble with my Zillions implementation is, a piece that captures a
Wall disappears until you make the board redraw itself.  When the computer
plays against itself, it's not a problem.  But when a human captures a
Wall, he needs to hit Ctrl-F twice or something.  It would be an easy, easy
thing for Zillions Development to fix.

I guess it's my own fault for trying to make two boards, one on top of the
other.  I just thought it would be more elegant that way.

Question: can a wounded friend move over (but obviously not stop on) a
square occupied by a mummy?  i am not sure.

if anybody wants to try this game with me by email, send to
[email protected]

Okay, but I don't believe that the Chancellor is worth less than the Q. The
midgame forking power of a piece that moves in 12 directions is quite
amazing, the Chancellor has exceptional ability to save an inferior game by
giving perpetual check, and finally,

the drawn cases of K+Q versus K+P are wins in the endgame K+NR vs K+P.

Of course there are positions that favor the Q, but all in all, my
experience says they are equal.

A Wounded Fiend (not 'friend' unless you are a truly scary creature) is
impeded by mummies, as indeed a Rook would be. Notice also that it cannot
retrace its steps because of its own ichor, and therefore, as Azgoroth once
said, 'carries within it the seeds of its own destruction'. (The endgame
where each side has one Wounded Fiend and nothing else can be quite
interesting.)

This game is tough to get used to. For a while I thought I had made a major
rules error, but in fact when a Leaf Pile engulfs, the mummy does not
appear until it moves on, and so the Leaf Pile is vulnerable to being
engulfed by an enemy Leaf Pile. If it were not so, the first player would
attack with Leaf Pile (engulfing his own Human for greater speed) and win
by force.

I am grateful for your effusive comments.

There will be more on the subject, as I like the game and have analyzed the
Weakest K versus Weakest King endgame -- it was very interesting.

But at the moment, I've gotten out a chessboard and some coins (with which
to mark mummies and statues) and am studying the play of the Game of
Nemoroth.

Oops. It seeme I misremembered what the Spirit told me in my dream, for
when I tried to play the game it was too easy to end up in an impasse with
no good way to break it; and the reason was clearly that the Go Aways were
not performing their intended role.

Then I tried a few games in which the Go Away moved by leaping two squares
Rookwise or by moving one square diagonally, and things seemed to work much
better -- in fact, just about exactly right, in conformance to the original
vision of the game.

It is funny how the Wounded Fiend seems to be such an unimportant piece,
when it was the original inspiration for the game.

Under 'Interactions', it should be added that

'Leaping pieces can cross unharmed a square seen by a Basilisk, for their
talons never touch the ground and therefore the Basilisk does not see
them.'

The interactions are so complicated! I need to make a chart to see if I
left anything else out.