💡📝Michael Nelson wrote on Tue, Nov 28, 2023 03:07 PM UTC:
I've found a flaw in this design--the opening Camel move to the fourth rank is too disruptive to the enemy development, so as White, Zillions always chooses it. This seems to result in an excess of White wins. A recent series of ten test games yielded 8 wins for White, 1 win for Black, and 1 lack of forces draw. This is not acceptable.
I'm experimenting with a fix: play on a 10x10 board, ten pawns on the third rank, pieces (except Camels) on the second rank as in Grand Chess (with the square next to the King empty), and Camels in the corners.
Initial testing looks good. If more tests show more balanced outcomes, I will update these pages accordingly; if not, I will withdraw the game.
For now, consider this game on hold.
BTW the new setup on the 10x10 has a much more pleasing appearance. The rather ugly Bishop Camel swap on one side of the board is no longer needed to give each player one Bishop and one Camel of each color.
I've found a flaw in this design--the opening Camel move to the fourth rank is too disruptive to the enemy development, so as White, Zillions always chooses it. This seems to result in an excess of White wins. A recent series of ten test games yielded 8 wins for White, 1 win for Black, and 1 lack of forces draw. This is not acceptable.
I'm experimenting with a fix: play on a 10x10 board, ten pawns on the third rank, pieces (except Camels) on the second rank as in Grand Chess (with the square next to the King empty), and Camels in the corners.
Initial testing looks good. If more tests show more balanced outcomes, I will update these pages accordingly; if not, I will withdraw the game.
For now, consider this game on hold.
BTW the new setup on the 10x10 has a much more pleasing appearance. The rather ugly Bishop Camel swap on one side of the board is no longer needed to give each player one Bishop and one Camel of each color.