Custom Search

[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

# Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Earlier
Faster and Faster Chess. Pieces move one square, then continue two, then continue three... (8x8, Cells: 64)
John Smith wrote on 2008-12-01 UTC
I just got an interesting idea. Allow pieces to move any amount of steps. Yes, that's right! Every step it gets more awkward, so they are not that powerful. The Rook is quite the unusual piece. It can move only like a normal Rook if the opposite square is empty. It's like a reverse-equispacious Rook.

George Duke wrote on 2008-11-29 UTCGood ★★★★
`Right, sorry. Only as a mnemonic the similarity. If we are not inclined, or used, to IAGO system of A, B, C, M, V, X, or Joyce's Track One and Track Two, we devise our own connections, usually multiple for better effect, whether CVs or pieces. We use themes or artists or copied/stolen pieces or size and so on to remember. These here are pieces in question anyway not entire CVs. When saying Bobber of Existentialist is ''like'' Rook or Bishop here, it is only mnemonically by way of 'x+1'. Bobber there is one stepping Queen, i.e. non-royal King, the first move; and then each (x+1) time its move gains strength of one more step. Another grouped as 'x+1' rather dramatically is Upchess' all the pieces. They are all Pawns in rank 1. Then rank 2 Knights, and so on for each 'x+1' rank, in the order P>N>B>R>Q>K>Q>R>B>N>P. So back to square ''one'' Pawn again at square eleven on Upchess' 11x11: the point being an 'x+1' mnemonic. Now Smith's new pieces would appear to be just that new, their 'x+1' within one move only, unlike Bobber. Fuller effects could be achieved the more enlarged the boards for Smith's particular piece-mutator here.`

J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on 2008-10-31 UTC
```I think the 'and then three' comment is redundant for the Knight, since six Knight-leaps in the same direction would require a board of 13 squares in at least one dimension.  Hmmm... using such a piece in a variant with a larger board, could the Rook and Bishop go 'and then four,' or is three the speed limit?

Come to think of it, a piece like this with a 'speed limit' of 2 might be interesting-- the Rookwise piece would be color-changing, while the Bishopwise one would remain colorbound, but switch Alfil-bindings... hmm, I just reinvented the Panda and the Bear.```