The site has moved to a new server, and there are now some issues to fix. Please report anything needing fixing with a comment to the homepage.



The Chess Variant Pages




[ 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

Outer Space Chess. Space-themed game with hyperspace and regular space boards. (5x8x2, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Carlos Martín-F. wrote on 2003-06-30 UTC
<font size='2'><p> After having a look at your game, I'm afraid that we have very different points of view about what a chess variant game should be (still, I'm not saying this is a problem, the world would be rather boring if we all had the same opinions!). <br><br> You seem to develop your game from a strictly mathematical basis. As a result, I sincerely wonder if the game is playable at all. I was disappointed at reading things such as <i>'The game has not yet been playtested, so most of my discussion will be coming either from rigorous analysis, or from the strategies that I tried to embed into the rules.'</i> I think games should be developed through playtesting, rather than from abstract mathematical theories, and I firmly believe that it is not the strategies that make the rules, but vice versa (although you have the right not to agree with me). I am absolutely surprised that you even dare write a 'Strategy and Tactics' section, when <i>'Not actually having played this game, some of this might be wrong'</i>. <br><br> I also do not see what the 'impediment' is about 43 being a prime number, unless the only shape you can think for a board is the rectangular one. And as for the notation of the cells, I don't think there's a need to add one number to identify boards when you only have two of them: let's call cells in ordinary space from <b>a1</b> to <b>e8</b> and cells in hyperspace simply <b>a</b>, <b>b</b> and <b>c</b>. <br><br> Finally, a word about simplicity. When I first tried designing Chess variants, I had the temptation of including a lot of special rules, and have lots of different pieces with complicated moves... then I learned that a game is not a recopilation of rules, and that a complex game is not necessarily a good game. Actually, when things are too complex, it is harder to keep all the rules in mind, and it results in a lack of playability. Some of my favourite Chess Variants are as simple as <b>Mono-dimensional Chess</b> by Luiz Carlos Campos, whose board has only ten squares. <br><br> This refers to some of the rules you include, such as <i>'No piece may remain in hyperspace for more than five consecutive turns unless it is impossible for them to leave'</i> (which makes you have to keep track of how many turns a piece has been in hyperspace), <i>'Nebulae may not move twice in a row. If a player is forced to move his Nebula in two consecutive turns, he must pass on the second'</i>... all this seems as if every time you find a flaw in your game, you fix a new rule to 'mend' the error somehow (an example of this would be tha last rule I mention, probably invented after suddenly finding that the Nebula was too mobile). I don't think this is an appropriate way of writing rules for a game. <br><br> (I hope I'm not offending anyone, since it is far from being my intention!) </p></font>