[ 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 ]Comments/Ratings for a Single Item Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later Kinglet. Win by taking all the pawns of the opponent. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Roberto Lavieri wrote on 2004-05-04 UTCExcellent ★★★★★We need a Preset in Courier for this extraordinary and simple variant of FIDE-Chess! Anonymous wrote on 2010-06-23 UTCGame would be even simpler if game's goal would be either to capture all pawns or checkmate! (zzo38) A. Black wrote on 2013-12-09 UTCGood ★★★★This game was also called "Imperial Fiddlesticks" in a text called "Curiouser&Curiouser" (also by V.R.Parton). Castling is not mentioned, but I should assume castling is still allowed, although the restriction of not moving into/out of/through check is ignored. However I may suggest a further variant: You don't lose if you have more than one king. (For example, if you have only one pawn and no king, then promoting will cause you to use instantly, but if you have one pawn and one king, then if you promote, you won't lose until either one of your two kings is being captured.) Greg Strong wrote on 2020-12-23 UTCI'm having difficulty getting an Interactive Diagram to work for this game also. It's basically just chess with Pawns as the extinction type. And pawns promote only to kings. So I thought this would be simple, but it doesn't seem to detect endgame and the AI does not move at all. The code is below (but it's also on the page so you can try it): files=8 ranks=8 promoZone=1 promoChoice=K royal=P graphicsDir=/graphics.dir/alfaeriePNG/ squareSize=50 graphicsType=png pawn:P:ifmnDfmWfceF:pawn:a2,b2,c2,d2,e2,f2,g2,h2,,a7,b7,c7,d7,e7,f7,g7,h7 knight:N:N:knight:b1,g1,,b8,g8 bishop:B:B:bishop:c1,f1,,c8,f8 rook:R:R:rook:a1,h1,,a8,h8 queen:Q:Q:queen:d1,,d8 king:K:KisO2:king:e1,,e8 H. G. Muller wrote on 2020-12-23 UTCYou must specify royal=1 , not royal=P . I suppose using a list of royal types similar to pomoChoice would be a better way to do it; currently you would have to specify a number of royal= parameters if you want to have multiple royal types. (But it is of course very unusual that you would.) Perhaps I should add a parameter royalTypes that works that way, which is then interpreted only after all pieces have been defined, and deprecate the royal parameter. 5 comments displayedEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ LaterPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.