H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Jan 6, 2018 01:52 PM UTC:
Note that what I like or don't like is just a matter of personal taste. Reasons I don't like FRC are that it offends my sense of symmetry, and that it often leads to start positions from where developing the pieces is awkward and cumbersome. Ease of development is something I appreciate in a Chess variant, and consider a trait of good design.
Orthodox Chess is rather unique by being a very well designed game, and still having a problem, namely that it has been played so much that the opening theory is now so well known that it is too easy to achieve a draw by rote learning. OTOH, opening theory is something most players of Chess-like games do like; prepairing an opening repertoire is a relatively easy way to get better at the game. So I don't think shuffle games are the best answer to the draw-death problem of orthodox Chess.
BTW, I never wanted to claim that new chess variants should not be designed before all existing ones have been played to death. I just see no point in generating 'more of the same' when there still is so much of the same that can be explored by other openings. In order to appeal to me, a Chess variant should provide something essentially new. Shogi is great because of the drops, Xiangqi is great because of the Cannons. Chu Shogi is great because of Lion power, Maka Dai Dai Shogi is great because of contageon. Chess with Different Armies is great because of the asymmetry.
Note that what I like or don't like is just a matter of personal taste. Reasons I don't like FRC are that it offends my sense of symmetry, and that it often leads to start positions from where developing the pieces is awkward and cumbersome. Ease of development is something I appreciate in a Chess variant, and consider a trait of good design.
Orthodox Chess is rather unique by being a very well designed game, and still having a problem, namely that it has been played so much that the opening theory is now so well known that it is too easy to achieve a draw by rote learning. OTOH, opening theory is something most players of Chess-like games do like; prepairing an opening repertoire is a relatively easy way to get better at the game. So I don't think shuffle games are the best answer to the draw-death problem of orthodox Chess.
BTW, I never wanted to claim that new chess variants should not be designed before all existing ones have been played to death. I just see no point in generating 'more of the same' when there still is so much of the same that can be explored by other openings. In order to appeal to me, a Chess variant should provide something essentially new. Shogi is great because of the drops, Xiangqi is great because of the Cannons. Chu Shogi is great because of Lion power, Maka Dai Dai Shogi is great because of contageon. Chess with Different Armies is great because of the asymmetry.