💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 09:43 PM UTC:
Very interesting, I looked through the known Double Move Variants and I really didn't know there were so few. There are elements of each one that I particularly don't like. One even sounded like an opposite of mine regarding returning to the original square after a capture.
Hit and Run Chess was developed with the premise of trying to keep the game as close to chess as possible, while keeping it balanced and not introducing new pieces with special moves.
The first move in any game can be pivotal. No matter what side you play. Starting out with 2 moves seemed to break the game. Equally, forcing only the first player to forfeit their second move seemed unfair. So both players open their games as they would in standard chess, they both move one piece once.
A straight line capture and advance also proved to be game breaking. Way O.P. and resulted in much faster and less interesting games. The concept of Hit and run was basically born, although not realized, by the introduction of the divergent path after capture. It seemed unfair that this affected all pieces except the knight. However, the night had one annoying predilection, that of striking out from behind the safety of the Pawn wall and retreating back to safety after capturing. So to even things out and to challenge both the player and his Knight, the Knight was restricted from doing this, Ostensibly applied under the divergent path rule, as for all pieces, their Starting square was along their path of attack and it seemed bth balancing and fair.
Capturing on the second move was also way over powered, as it could conceivably result in a Check Mate without Check, which is why I suppose, other variants impose the end of turn if a check is made on the first move. However, who wants to lose their second move, really. So to further drive home the idea of Hit and Run Chess, and the thing that truly gave it life, was to limit all captures to only the first move of any piece. Thus also allowing the wonderful feeling of being able to capture two pieces in the same turn when moving two pieces once, while making the second move of any piece that captured on it's first move. a maneuvering move.
As balanced and fair as possible, uncomplicated due to retaining all of the regular rules as far as how the pieces themselves move. Should be easy to remember as there are only a few stipulation.
Move one piece twice, two pieces once, Capture only on the first move of any piece, and taking a divergent path if moving one piece after capturing.
Well, I guess you might not be interested as to why the game has evolved to what it is, but I found it interesting how these other variants approached the same issues.
Very interesting, I looked through the known Double Move Variants and I really didn't know there were so few. There are elements of each one that I particularly don't like. One even sounded like an opposite of mine regarding returning to the original square after a capture.
Hit and Run Chess was developed with the premise of trying to keep the game as close to chess as possible, while keeping it balanced and not introducing new pieces with special moves.
The first move in any game can be pivotal. No matter what side you play. Starting out with 2 moves seemed to break the game. Equally, forcing only the first player to forfeit their second move seemed unfair. So both players open their games as they would in standard chess, they both move one piece once.
A straight line capture and advance also proved to be game breaking. Way O.P. and resulted in much faster and less interesting games. The concept of Hit and run was basically born, although not realized, by the introduction of the divergent path after capture. It seemed unfair that this affected all pieces except the knight. However, the night had one annoying predilection, that of striking out from behind the safety of the Pawn wall and retreating back to safety after capturing. So to even things out and to challenge both the player and his Knight, the Knight was restricted from doing this, Ostensibly applied under the divergent path rule, as for all pieces, their Starting square was along their path of attack and it seemed bth balancing and fair.
Capturing on the second move was also way over powered, as it could conceivably result in a Check Mate without Check, which is why I suppose, other variants impose the end of turn if a check is made on the first move. However, who wants to lose their second move, really. So to further drive home the idea of Hit and Run Chess, and the thing that truly gave it life, was to limit all captures to only the first move of any piece. Thus also allowing the wonderful feeling of being able to capture two pieces in the same turn when moving two pieces once, while making the second move of any piece that captured on it's first move. a maneuvering move.
As balanced and fair as possible, uncomplicated due to retaining all of the regular rules as far as how the pieces themselves move. Should be easy to remember as there are only a few stipulation.
Move one piece twice, two pieces once, Capture only on the first move of any piece, and taking a divergent path if moving one piece after capturing.
Well, I guess you might not be interested as to why the game has evolved to what it is, but I found it interesting how these other variants approached the same issues.
I'm definitely biased ... :)