[ 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 3D Chess, a Different Way of Looking at It. A scheme for a geometric translation of 2d piece moves into 3d.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Chris Witham wrote on 2004-06-19 UTCI've been thinking on this a lot lately and I think I've made the game better. I still have yet to program it into a computer or find someone who is crazy enough to play, so it is all theoretical. First off the diagonal move has changed. That changes the bishop, king, queen, and pawn. Second I’ve redefined the knight. Also as suggested I have come up with new names for some of the pieces. The rook is now the octahedron, because it’s move makes the outline of an octahedron. The new bishop is a cube, because it’s move makes the outline of a cube. The old bishop, not used, would be a cubeoctahedron. (When I say 2d rook or bishop I mean the normal chess version as translated into three dimensions. So a 2d rook moves in a line forward, backward, sideways, straight up, and straight down.) The new bishop (cube) move is one moving as a 2d bishop, moving as a three dimensional mover (unicorn) or moving as a 2-d bishop then a three-dimensional mover outward. The new bishop is not colorbound. A picture of the spaces covered is here: http://members.lycos.co.uk/christhecynic/hpbimg/Chess/cube.bmp The pawn moves one step straight forward, or one step forward as a cube, which is one step as an ordinary bishop or one step as a unicorn. http://members.lycos.co.uk/christhecynic/hpbimg/Chess/pawn.bmp The king moves as a bishop or as a rook, thus covering the entire 3x3x3 cube around it. The queen moves as a bishop (cube) or a rook (octahedron) http://members.lycos.co.uk/christhecynic/hpbimg/Chess/king.bmp The knight moves one step as a bishop then one step straight (orthogonally) outward. This no longer follows the “squares a queen can’t go to” rule, but it is closer to the appropriate value, though still weak, and it does seem a bit more elegant than anything else. I wanted to show a picture of each of the pieces, especially the ones that were changed, but my computer goes to hell every time I try to upload a new image. The rook (octahedron) as I think I’ve already stated moves as a 2d rook, a 2d bishop, as a 2d rook then outward as a 2d bishop. http://members.lycos.co.uk/christhecynic/hpbimg/Chess/Rook.bmp The queen moves as a bishop (cube) or a rook (octahedron) I don’t know what you would call it as cubeoctahedron would be the name of the old bishop. http://members.lycos.co.uk/christhecynic/hpbimg/Chess/RookCube.bmp - There may be space for additional rules. For example a rook blocked on orthogonal adjacent squares could still move as a 2d bishop. So perhaps it would be better to say that it moves once as a rook, then again at a right angle and then continues out as a bishop. While this sounds a bit confusing it should be simple to remember and will prevent the rook from moving when blocked. The same can be said for the bishop, if all three diagonals surrounding a 3d move are blocked it shouldn’t be able to use that 3d move. This is not likely to happen often, but if it does these two rules would eliminate an annoyance. On the other hand the rule itself might prove more annoying to remember. One thing that annoys me to no end is the freedom of movement behind the pawns. I can’t just add additional pieces to block it up, but I don’t want the pieces there so free to move around. One possibility, not elegant at all but the best I can come up with, is to have the space behind an unmoved pawn impassable. The exception would be the starting spaces of the major pieces. This would definitely restrict movement, and it would be easy enough to tell what was impassable, but it’s a bit of an odd rule I think. - I’ve also been thinking about other pieces. I think it is best to consider the Wazir as it is now, that being a one-dimensional single step. That does something I consider odd though, it makes it so that a Wazir rider is different from a rook (octahedron) also the Wazir, Dabbabah and (0,3) leaper are all very, very weak compared to their bishop based counterparts, which are not even colorbound. The crooked bishop has two possible moves, one where it makes a line, and one where it mirrors the rook (octahedron) I chose the second for the reason I always thought of the crooked bishop as a bishop version or a rook. I wanted to show a picture of this, but as I said I can’t upload right now. It looks sort of like ripples on a pond, if that makes sense. - At some point I should probably ask them to updatye the page, but before then I need to get the picture of the knight and probably make all of the pictures smaller.