Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I made a few more edits. You use the word field a lot to refer to spaces. Is Feld the word for space in German?

While the concept behind this game seems interesting, I am not clear on the mechanics of movement. In your Knight diagram, it does not look like you have applied the rule for the Knight's movement consistently. The Knight on 5 is shown being able to move to g7, but 5 and g7 are on the same diagonal.

It is not clear to me what this diagram is illustrating:

I use the word 'field' as a synonym for playing field or square. 'Field' has nothing to do with space in German.

Fig.10: The diagonal from 5 affects the squares up to e8 or up to d1, so g7 is not on the same diagonal. The rules are therefore applied consistently.

The diagram should clarify the following: A move between field 4 and field a4 respectively a move between field 5 and field h5 isn't possible. In the row the next field which can be reached by 4 is field b4 (g5 by 5).

I'm still not following how Bishop or Knight moves work. I think more procedural descriptions of how these pieces move would help.

In this diagram, it looks like the Bishop can move from b5 to b3 or from g4 to g6. Is that a correct interpretation? Step-by-step, how is the presence of transfer fields affecting the Bishop's moves?

"In this diagram, it looks like the Bishop can move from b5 to b3 or from g4 to g6. Is that a correct interpretation?" Yes, that is the correct interpretation. Step by step: The bishop can change his diagonal. That's the point of this variant. From b5 to b3 or from g4 to g6 (and so on up/down the diagonal) means that the bishop has changed his diagonal. Isn't that absolutely new? I mean yes. You have to understand the transfer fields as mediators between two diagonals (colors). Transfer fields are ambivalent and allow the 'color change'. No more and no less, but this is clearly more than normal chess has to offer.

Step by step: The bishop can change his diagonal. That's the point of this variant. From b5 to b3 or from g4 to g6 (and so on up/down the diagonal) means that the bishop has changed his diagonal.

When you said step by step, I was expecting a step by step explanation, but you didn't provide one. Could a Bishop move from d1 to e8 along the path d1-c2-b3-a4/4-b5-c6-d7-e8?

I use the word 'field' as a synonym for playing field or square. 'Field' has nothing to do with space in German.

The English word ‘space’ is used to refer to individual squares (or other shapes if boards are irregular) of the board. ‘Square’ is also used, as is ‘cell’ (especially in 3D) or ‘hex’ in hexagonal‐cell games. As ‘Feld’ is indeed, as Fergus rightly intuited, used for the same thing in German, it is thus the German word for space in this sense. Conversely, ‘field’ in English is rather unusual as a way of referring to spaces (i.e. squares ⁊c.)

Of course the usual sense of ‘space’ is better translated as ‘Raum’ or the like (hence e.g. Raumschach), but that sense is not what's meant here

This reads better, but it seems to be stating the obvious

My reading of the German suggests that ‘Farbtransfer’ — i.e. ‘Colour Transfer’ — is being use in a slightly more technical sense to refer to a particular kind of event (cf. e.g. ‘Bishop Conversion’ due to Carlos Cetina, which is more specific than simply converting bishops by some arbitrary means); after all, neither ‘Farbtransfer’ nor ‘colour transfer’ is an everyday word or phrase. And since the German also does not mention possibility (*‘dann muss ein Farbtransfer stattfinden können’) I'd probably translate it as your tautological‐looking one, but with ‘Colour Transfer’ capitalised

Could a Bishop move from d1 to e8 along the path d1-c2-d4/4-b5-c6-d7-e8?

Assuming ‘d4’ is a typo for ‘a4’, then my reading of the rules agrees that it could indeed take this path, or instead a path d1–e2–f3–g4–5–g6–f7–e8.

The position on the Switches must be clear. Either field 4 or field a4 [but not both; analogously for 5/h5] must be occupied

In other words, a piece moving onto the switch must choose on the turn that it gets there which squares it can move off onto? And so e.g. a rook can checkmate a king on h8 from h1, h2, h3, or h4, but not h5 or 5?

Assuming ‘d4’ is a typo for ‘a4’,

Yes, and I made some other typos, which I have since corrected in the original.

"Could a Bishop move from d1 to e8 along the path d1-c2-b3-a4/4-b5-c6-d7-e8?" (a4/4 is a typo, h5/5 is correct)

Yes, that is possible, but only in two moves. The first move goes up to square 5 and in another move up to e8. It's like normal chess. The bishop started from a white diagonal and after a second move the bishop stands on a 'black' diagonal. This means a color transfer (Color Change or whatever is correct) has taken place.

"Assuming ‘d4’ is a typo for ‘a4’, then my reading of the rules agrees that it could indeed take this path, or instead a path d1–e2–f3–g4–5–g6–f7–e8."

The path d1–e2–f3–g4–5–g6–f7–e8 is absolutely correct - but in two moves. Move 1 via d1-e2-f3-g4 to square 5, then move 2 via g6-f7 to square e8.

"And so e.g. a rook can checkmate a king on h8 from h1, h2, h3, or h4, but not h5 or 5?"

That's not according to the rules. Correct is: a rook can checkmate a king on h1 from h8, h7, h6, but not from h5 or 5.

The parallel situation looks like this: a rook can checkmate a king on a8 from a1, a2, a3, but not from 4 or a4.

That's not according to the rules. Correct is: a rook can checkmate a king on h1 from h8, h7, h6, but not from h5 or 5.

Of course. I think I accidentally started on the wrong side of the board and then applied half a correction (it was late last night). But in any case that still answers my question, Thanks

"Could a Bishop move from d1 to e8 along the path d1-c2-b3-a4/4-b5-c6-d7-e8?" (a4/4 is a typo, h5/5 is correct)

No, a4/4 is not a typo. It is sandwiched between b3 and b5, and h5/5 is on the other side of the board from these spaces.

Yes, that is possible, but only in two moves.

Okay, but here's what you wrote previously:

"In this diagram, it looks like the Bishop can move from b5 to b3 or from g4 to g6. Is that a correct interpretation?" Yes, that is the correct interpretation.

To be clear, my questions were about what a Bishop could do on a single move. If the longer move I described cannot be done as a single move, then I would presume that B b5-b3 is illegal for similar reasons. Or is there some asymmetry that allows one and forbids the other? I should ask, could either "B b4-b3" or "B b3-b5" ever count as a legal move?

I have indeed trouble with your question. I don't understand how "B b4-b3" or "B b3-b5" has anything to do with a bishop's moves.

I want to answer your question like this and hope that I'm on the right track. You ask what a bishop can do with one move.

Let's start from d1. The bishop can move to the left via c2-b3-a4 to square a5. The following move is also possible: d1 via c2-b3 to square 4. From there, the color change takes place in a second move by reaching the squares b5-c6-d7 to e8. To the right, the bishop can go to square 5, via e2-f3-g4.

If you think that's an asymmetry, then that's the result of the new board geometry. The opponent has the mirrored move options and thus equal opportunities.

Did I understand and answer your question correctly?

I have indeed trouble with your question. I don't understand how "B b4-b3" or "B b3-b5" has anything to do with a bishop's moves.

You may be familiar with abbreviated algebraic notation, such as Bb3, which would mean to move a Bishop to b3. This abbreviated notation depends upon knowledge of the position and knowledge of the rules. Without these, you don't know where the Bishop is, and if a player has more than one Bishop, you don't know which Bishop to move there.

Since Chess variants are played by a variety of different rules, it helps to use a generic rule-blind notation that can work equally well for different variants. The notation I used explicitly spells out a move in a manner that someone could follow without knowing the rules of the game in question. First of all, "B b4-b3" is a typo. I meant to write "B b5-b3", which means a move by the Bishop on b5 to b3. This is a possible move only if there is already a Bishop on b5, and whether it's a legal move depends on the rules of the game. In Miller's Spherical Chess, for example, it would sometimes be a legal move. Likewise, "B b3-b5" means a move by a Bishop on b3 to b5. It should now be evident what these have to do with Bishop moves.

Thanks for your explanations, I didn't know that. This abbreviated notation makes sense.

The moves "B b5-b3" and "B b3-b5" you mentioned as examples are not legal moves in my variant. With the exception of the rules for the new squares 4 and 5 and for the switches 4/a4 and h5/5, the FIDE rules are valid exclusively.

I think we've clarified that a Bishop cannot pass through a transfer field on its move. To switch color, it must stop on a transfer field, and then it may use its next move to switch to spaces of the other color.

My next question concerns which directions of movement are available to a Bishop on a transfer field. Let's say a Bishop is on a4/4. I presume it can move to a5, b5, c5, or c3, but it cannot move to a3. Likewise, a Bishop on h5/5 could move to h4, g4, f4, and g6 but not to h6. Is that correct?

The way I understand it is that ranks 5-8 are shifted one square left:

							h5	h5'
a4'	a4

Whenever a move passes through a4 from below, it can be continued normally, or like the upper board half was not shifted (i.e. from a4'), and similar for h4 reached from above. a4' cannot be reached from below.

"Let's say a bishop is on a4/4."

Let me be specific: a bishop doesn't stand on a4/4; he stands either on 4 or a4. The player must clearly mark the location.

If the bishop is on 4, then his path goes via b5, c6, d7 to e8. In the other direction it goes via b3, c2 to d1.

If the bishop is on a4, then he can choose; he can go down to d1 as before. He can move upwards to a5 in a first move, to go via b6, c7 to d8 in a second move. The other option is to move to f8 via c5, d6, e7.

There are no other move-options.

"Whenever a move passes through a4 from below, it can be continued normally, or like the upper board half was not shifted."

That is correct!

"a4' cannot be reached from below."

Of course, a4' (I'll call it 4) can be reached from below. For example, if you start from d1, you can reach the switch 4/a4 upwards. The player must then decide whether to occupy square 4 or square a4 and mark this clearly through his positioning. After that he either stands on 4 or on a4. Then the player can proceed as described in the reply to Fergus Duniho.

What I meant is that a4' cannot be reached from a3.

My description was not complete, though, as I did not mention what would happen when a move starts from or ends on a4/a4'. I understand now that when you end there you have to choose which of the two to occupy. Which is only relevant for when you move into the upper board half; a move into the lower board half would always look as if you started from a4.

Can a Rook move through a switch on a single move? Which of these moves could be legal?

• R a1-a8
• R a1-b8
• R a8-a1
• R b8-a1

"Can a Rook move through a switch on a single move?" Yes, of course. Otherwise, a rook on a1 could not checkmate a king on a8 in one move.

R a1-a8 = legal; R a1-b8 = legal; R a8-a1 = legal; R b8-a1 = legal

"What I meant is that a4' cannot be reached from a3."

Why not? A rook, pawn or queen starting from a3 and occupying the switch must decide which square of the switch is to occupy - 4 or a4.

"a move into the lower board half would always look as if you started from a4."

That's not true: A rook on a8 that wants to move to the lower half of the board can occupy square 4, but not a4. A rook on b8 can occupy a4, but not 4. Incidentally, in this direction the distinction between 4/a4 makes no sense for a rook (or queen). The switch only works in one direction. Either from the lower half of the board starting from a1, a2, a3, or from the upper half of the board starting from h8, h7, h6.

By a Bishop. In the way I had drawn it, the orthogonal moves you describe would not enter a4' directly; they would enter a4, and then optionally transfer to a4'.

The other phrase you quote was intended to describe what happens when you start on a4/a4'.

It is still a bit ambiguous how a knight could move from h6 if h5/h5' is occupied, (and the switch thus in a known position).