Rated Comments for a Single Item

~~Later~~ ⇩Reverse Order⇧ ~~Earlier~~

Outback Chess. New pieces on plus-shaped board. (10x10, Cells: 84) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Charles Gilman wrote on Thu, Jan 15, 2004 09:28 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

If you ever invent a larger version of this with extra piece types, one combination of name and move might be a WALLABY with Wazir and Alibaba moves (i.e. like a Champion in the 104-square Omega Chess). The name would fit both the component moves and the similarity to the Kangaroo move.

Timothy R. Newton wrote on Mon, Jul 28, 2003 10:53 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

Thank you for the kind comment. I am pleasantly surprised to hear that I won the contest! I can't believe that I won with so many people entered in the contest with their cool games. I am glad to know that the judges liked my game as much as you do. :)

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Mon, Jul 7, 2003 12:47 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

Yesterday night I have made some tests, And I must admit Michael Nelson is
right, if the forward Platypus movement is reduced to one with exception
of movement from first rank, the game slows too much. Perhaps if the range
is equal for the horizontal and vertical, say range two except from first
rank, the result is better, but the game has its own idiosincracy as is,
and now I accept that, but first I have to try for being convinced.
Platypus is a clever piece in the game, it can promote to a piece more
powerful that any other piece in the game, but the promotion is not a
necessary win for the team of the promoted Platypus, it depends on
position. I like this 'Australian' game, but the duck faced Platypus
made me take some minutes of atemption

Roberto Lavieri wrote on Sun, Jul 6, 2003 09:10 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

I like this game, I have playtested it, and it is interesting enough for make a comment. About Platypus movement, I should prefer limit the three forward only to its first movement, or perhaps only from the first rank. It is a promoting piece, and it can promote to a powerful piece in this game, but it can reach the last rank in three steps. The argument that it is not easy is partially valid, but not at all, it depends on the instance of game you are playing. No more details, it is a very good game.

Michael Nelson wrote on Fri, Apr 18, 2003 05:07 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

I have playtested this game extensively in the course of judging Group A. The rules make it sound like a cute game and it is--but it has surprising depth. I will be giving more detail after the judging is complete, but I really wanted to recommend this fine game.

Peter Aronson wrote on Thu, Dec 5, 2002 06:28 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

I have a question about the Spearman, too. Can the Spearman move two forward <strong>without</strong> capturing any enemy piece? Or does the two square forward move require an opposing piece to kill on one of the two diagonally forward squares?

6 comments displayed

~~Later~~ ⇩Reverse Order⇧ ~~Earlier~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.