[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Comments/Ratings for a Single Item Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier Feeble Los Alamos Chess. Los Alamos Chess using Feeble pieces. (6x6, Cells: 36) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on 2002-07-06 UTC> never really considered Progressive Feeble Chess Why not? Progressive Demi Chess was mentioned. Your idea of Slowly Progressing Progressive Chess is a new and interesting general idea that deserves its own writeup. With links to cambiamarce and others. I think you found a new idea in an area that appeared to be exhausted. David Howe wrote on 2002-07-05 UTCHmmmm... I never really considered Progressive Feeble Chess. But now that you mention it, it seems as if such a game would work quite well. Perhaps it would even play better than regular progressive chess. In my opinion, progressive chess progresses a bit too quickly, so perhaps *gradual* progressive feeble chess would be more to my liking. Gradual progressive uses a progression that grows more slowly: instead of 1 2 3 4 5... it uses 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5... A bit harder to keep track of, but perhaps it tones down the game a little bit. I'd try it with the Italian progressive rules. A 5x5 version would be possible, although I think it might start getting cramped at that point. Honestly, I chose Los Alamos mostly out of laziness. gnohmon wrote on 2002-07-05 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I really did mean to get back to Feeble/Weakest Chess and write some more. Be patient, perhaps I will. You should say it is neither necessary nor possible to block check. Your comments on chasing down and retreating show that you have playtested the Feeble pieces. I know this because I've been there as well. If I had suggested a Feeble game for those who lack patience, I would have suggested 'Progressive Feeble Chess'. The idea of small-board feeble chess would never have occurred to me, and of course any idea I wouldn't have thought of seems just brilliant to me -- that's human nature. However, is this the smallest possible feeble chess? Or would it work on a 5x5 board? 3 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.