[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Contest to design a 10-chess variant. Cebrating 10 years of Chess Variant Pages with a contest to design a chess variant.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Absolutely, I agree with Peter Aronson, is very possible that MORE10 is not going to be a very successful game, but it was not the objective in the construction of such miniature. It was a challenge, nothing more. Of course, this game can`t compete against Eurasian (-by example-)or some other good entry, in the same terms. This is the reason I`m going to send another game soon, a decimal variant. Honestly, I think the other coming game is much more competitive, but it is only my opinion. Wait, see, enjoy it if you feel it good, and then judge. The game is almost ready, but I have to decide, finally, if the new game is symmetrical or not. It is very possible I`m going to decide symmetry. The reasons?: circumstances preference and some fashion things involved.
I've been doing some extensive playtesting of my creation and find that it plays well--the win condition works very well. Some serious endgame testing with Zillions has lead me to change the last piece conditions. Now a the full win/loss/draw conditions are: 1. Having pieces worth 10 or more points on your tenth rank at the beginning of your turn wins. 2. Capturing your opponent's last piece wins. 3. Losing your own last piece via suicide capture loses. 4. Doing 2 & 3 on the same move (leavng an empty board) wins. 5. Stalemate, triple repetition, and the 50-move rule are draws.
Roberto: I named the variant TenCubed Chess because the number 10 occurs 3 times in the description. I could have used other people's trademarks and called it 'Grand Omega Chess'.
My ten squares game is asymmetric, making it symmetric I found it less interesting, with a trivial end in very few moves almost all the time.
Ten Cubed Chess?. Yes, it sounds tri-dimensional. Any reason?
TenCubed Chess has ten kinds of pieces on a 10x10 board. Players use an entire Omega Chess set, plus an archbishop (B+N) and a marshall (R+N) for each side. I have been playtesting the TenCubed.zrf for a week. Of course, I can always change the name if anyone is planning a 3D variant with 1000 cells!
Roberto, I am in fact doing the design and testing by writing a ZRF, so the implementation takes care of itself. The gameplay is interesting and the piece set works well. I will need some more endgame testing and may changes some of the rules (stalemate, last piece, etc). But in essense I have a game design I'm happy with.
Mike, it sounds interesting, the rules of ten points are pretty. Are you implementing a ZRF?. I have posted a ZRF for my game, named MORE10 (It is based on a game I have not published, MORE, but the rules and pieces movements in the new MORE10 are not the same, I have adapted it to ten squares, of course, trying to make a game not trivial, and it was a headache, due the board dimensions. I have tested the new game, and it is nice, the average number of moves to finish is around 20, but some games spent 30 moves or more. Zillions vs. Zillions have offered good games, but Zillion´s tendence is to make the same first moves before move 4 or 5, and it is not the only alternative, as I have tested in games Roberto vs. Zillions. I´m thinking on other entry, but in a bigger board (as lobby, it is a game with, at least, one enterely new and not conventional piece). I suppose there are other entries coming soon, at least Greg and Jared told us they are trying to prepare games. Let´s see.
I'm putting the finishing touches on my entry (which I'm tenatively naming 'Decima') It has a 10x10 board, 10 non-pawn piece types, and a win condition of 10 'points' on the tenth rank. The pieces are King (non-royal), Knight, Bishop, Rook, and the six 2-element combination pieces. The pieces are given point values in the inverse order of material value/mobility. King = 10 Knight = 9 Bishop = 8 Rook = 7 Duke (K+N) = 6 Pope (K+B) = 5 Dragon King (K+R) =4 Palladin (N+B) = 3 Marshall (N+R) = 2 Queen (B+R) = 1 Pawns have no point value but may promote to any combination piece that has been lost. Moving a piece to the tenth rank so that the total point value of your pieces on the tenth rank is 10 or more is check. If the opponent cannot capture a piece that reduces your point total to 9 or less, it is mate. The capture of a piece on its tenth rank is a suicide capture (capturing piece is also removed from the board) whether or not a check conditon exists. Stalemate and repetiton are draws. If both armies are reduced to 9 points or less on the whole board (counting Pawns as 6 each for this purpose), the game is drawn. Capturing your opponent's last piece is a draw by stalemate unless the capturing move causes the point total on your tenth rank to be 10 or more, then it is mate. Eliminating your own last piece by suicide capture draws by stalemate provided that it does not not leave the opponent with 10 or more points on the tenth rank (this would be an illegal move as it does not relieve check) or unless the opponent can bring his point total on the tenth rank to 10 or more points on the next move. The last piece rules are logical extrapolations of the FIDE rules for check, mate, and stalemate. If you have no pieces on the board when your turn comes, you have no legal move--if you are in check, this is mate; if not, this is stalemate.
I have sent an entry for the contest: a Chess variant in a board of only ten squares. Wait until posted, see and enjoy.
I have invented a Chess variants in a board of exactly ten squares, and it seems to be non-trivial. I have implemented a (primitive ZRF), and Zillions vs. Zillions offered good games, with an average of around 15-20 moves to finish. Nevertheless, White seems to have an advantage (4-1?, according to Zillions experiments). I have to refine the ideas, and it is possible the next week I´ll submit the revised game. I´m not going to give a description yet, until finished, because some changes may come.
Tetraktys Chess rules sound interesting, but it should be good a test for playability and to see if it is a trivial game (forced draw or forced white victory), and to measure how long a typical game should be. I have not tested it yet, but my initial appretiation is that a victory of any of both bands should be difficult (more for Black) unless clear blunders, Let´s see a test.
Tetraktys Chess. Squares are Pythagorean ascending 4-3-2-1, each square half offset right and left: in other words, a row of one sits over a row of two squares, over three, over four. Squares are numbered top-down: 1, 2-3, 4-5-6, 7-8-9-10. Two piece types are drop-placed in the first two moves. Lateral one-step move always available. Piece 'A' has one-step-up option if there is any piece (of either colour) adjacent to it; otherwise 'A' can go one step down. Piece 'K' has one-step-down option if there is any piece adjacent; else 'K' can go one step up. In addition, there is an 'off-board'(notionally one-step sideways) allowed from any of 1,2,3,4,6,7,or 10 to any other non-adjacent and vacant square from among those seven. Squares 5,8, and 9 are excluded from this off-board non-capturing move. Sqs. 5,8,9 can of course be reached variously by normal one-s-u, one-s-d, or ordinary one-step lateral(from one or two of 4,6,7,10). Move is required, no null move. No piece may remain in the 7-8-9-10 row for four turns. If and when only two pieces left, no piece may remain in the 7-8-9-10 row for three turns. Goal: capture the other's two pieces. Inability to move also loses.
It should be interesting to see!. My own ideas in exactly ten squares are so stupid, that I´ll need some time to think on a better ten-squares game, if I can (I´ll try). By the way, I have in mind two or three other '10' games, possibly interesting, but in bigger boards.
📝Greg Strong wrote on Mon, Feb 14, 2005 01:34 PM UTC:I've got a ten-square game that I think might be pretty interesting. I'll try to post a quick description in the next day or two.
I'm willing to take on THE DIFFICULT PROBLEM. It most certainly can be done, and I believe I shall try.
The links to the other contests don't seem to be working.
That triangular arrangement of 10 objects is sometimes called the 'tetraktys.'
The natural of course is the Pythagorean ascending 4-3-2-1, each square half offset. What is the name for that famous design? Then use just two piece types with maybe self-modifying rule of movement. One completion: piece adjacent one step up at option, else one step down at option; lateral one-step always available. Each one's other piece-type has opposite orientation. Goal: capture the other's two pieces. If no other move available, one step any direction always permitted.
I have some ideas for 10x10, 8x10, 10x8, 7x10, ten pieces for each band, special rules in turns multiples of ten, etc, etc. I think there are more inventors which can have some ideas too, using the number ten in some manner, but I want to see at least one good idea for THE DIFFICULT PROBLEM: A playable and interesting chess variant in a board of exactly TEN SQUARES.
21 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.