[ 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 ]Single Comment Peasant Revolt. Modest variant with unequal setup. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]George Duke wrote on 2017-02-09 UTCOn 30.Jan.2017 H.G. Muller brought up pawn-accompanied 7N versus 3Q: End_Games. Here is where he originally broached researching this match-up among others, http://www.chessvariants.com/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=25357, in several Peasant Revolt statements of different unusual endgames -- because not normal Beginners' Chess piece mixes that get memorized from tables. George Svokos says too(All Comments PR) it takes K+N+N+N+N to defeat K, that three Knights are not enough. Of course games are won with definitional insufficient mating material depending on the leftover position. Usually you want the best definitions to exclude such cases, but the present example you can arrange K+3N to a mated position (not all of them necessarily Helpmates).Muller's very insight then that "that the Knights could do better than they do now, with a bit more strategic insight" has parallel in my on-again maintaining that on 8x10 Rook versus Falcon should turn out to be 5.0 to up to 5.75 maximum, if Falcons are instructed to strategically open as early as possible. Board size almost always factor, and on 8x10 or certainly 10x10, the 3Q will defeat especially 6N more or even most often(majority); on 10x10 the Peasant Revolt mix tilts way towards the Knights and Black. Rules are crucial too raised by Charles Gilman's query, is promotion in yQs v. xNs to Queen both sides, or not?