Rated Comments for a Single Item

Excellent concept. One can quibble about the class certain pieces ought to be in, and the extra basic rules are slightly complex, but cool variant.

My tentative estimates for the piece values of this variant are: Class 1: P=1; Class 2: N=3.5, B=3.5; Class 3: R=5.5, NN=5.75, SB=6; Class 4: C=7.5, SR=8; Class 5: Q=10, M=10, SC=10, CC=10.25; Class 6: MM=12.25, SM=12.5, SCC=12.75; Class 7: A=14.5, SMM=14.75; Class 8: AA=16.75. Note that I tend to agree with various world class chess players who historically gave the fighting value of K=4 for on an 8x8 board. I also tend to agree with chess authorities who in the past valued a B microscopically better than a N on average, so perhaps a better value for a N (or the N component portion of any of the appropriate compound pieces listed above) might be, say, 3.49, to reflect this belief, though I prefer not to use ugly fractions when thinking of most piece exchange value calculations that might arise.

I would have to extend my criticism of Crazyhouse to this game, and echo Mr Dukes sentiments.

While I like the concept, I don't think its an actually good game.

My proposed amendment of the drop in rule (pieces are played in with non capture from the spot they were captured) likely brings an improvement here as well.

Non immediate promotion is also unsatisfactory; why not allow pieces to promote immediately on rotationally symmetric opposite squares?

To me these are the most logical ways of importing Shogis mechanics into the more energetic game of FIDE.

One of the best variants, certainly and Michael Nelson, I think, is also one of the best variant designers.

I would like to see an expanded (more complete) list of pieces added to the classes.

Also, maybe an extension for some of the more powerful pieces, as with tripunch pieces and cylindrical / toroidal pieces? Would be fun to have classes 9 and even 10.

Abdul, can you please tell me what you mean by superknight and supernightrider?

Just want to know.

This is a very interesting game, far from easy to play in a good manner.
Material advantage should be good, but it is much less important than in
FIDE-Chess. Defensive schemes can be good for a team in a slight
disdvantage, because the superior team, if wants a victory, must attack,
and always some weaknesses can appear, because pieces used in attacks
can´t defend weak positions in many cases. The superior team can´t
construct easely the victory positionally step by step as in FIDE-Chess.
In Chess, the main mennace is the convertibility of the advantage in Pawns
which can promote to Queens, here it is not the case, promotions add a bit
more power, but not enough for a victory in many cases. Openings must be
played carefully, conversions to Nightriders can cause serious damages to
the enemy if he plays with some ingenuity about these pieces. isolated
pieces are not good, and unprotected Kings are worse. Positions must
change dinamically and mantaining reasonable solid structures, don´t stay
with the same structure and pieces types all the time, some structures are
more sensitive to some piece types, and other structures to other pieces.
Every player must try to cover his weak points before attacks, or
counter-attacks can be devasting... I have launched the idea of redefining
the Super Cardinal as a class 6 piece, but it seems there is not consense.
This is not only the most powerful piece in its class, but its power is
almost the same as the class 6 Super-Chancellor. Super-Cardinals can cause
demolishing effects in many ends, due the usual sparsity of the pieces, and
a Queen is not equally comparable with it, because it is not only the
mobility in consideration, but the potential attacks against the enemy
King, considering that this piece can be dropped. Classes 7 and 8 seems to
be unnecessary, in my opinion. I know that many players are not gained with
the idea of re-defining the classes, but I want hear more opinions about
it.

This is a very interesting game. I look forward to playing it in GCT #2.

Below is a list of mobility values for all the pieces in Pocket Mutation, as well as a few Chess-With-Different-Armies pieces at the bottom for comparison. The 'average mobility' column is a Betza Mobility Calculation with a magic number of 0.7. This is probably the best estimation of the value of the piece. The second column is the average number of checks this piece delivers on an empty board without being counter-attacked. The third column is the average number of different 'directions' in which this piece attacks. The fourth column is the average number of squares attacked on an empty board.

1. P b2-b3 
1... p d7-d5 
2. R a1-p1; I-p1 // pocket nightrider 
2... b c8-d7 
3. I p1-b2 //  is a PMChess Fool's Mate.  Neat!

This variant has the potential to go beyond excellent. Bringing Class 4 up to four pieces yields 21 different pieces for the game, including the King. And 21, being the product of the magic numbers 3 and 7, makes a traditional choice for a complete set. I suggest adding the SuperAlibaba to Class 4, as its WFAD moves make a nice change from long range pieces.

Is mutuation when pocketing a piece from the eighth rank optional or
mandatory?  For example, White pockets a KnightRider from a8 -- does he
have the option of retaining a KnightRider or is he forced to 'upgrade'
to a Cardinal or SuperRook.  White may find the NR ability too useful to
give up.

What if you added a new Piece, the 'SuperKnightRider', or 'KingRider',
which moves as King or KnightRider?  Would this be approximately the right
strength for a Class 4 Piece?  If you think it is too strong, perhaps a
FerzRider or WazirRider would be better.

I'm presently losing my game of Pocket Mutation Chess against Peter
Aronson in Invent-and-Play Section 2, and it is obviously a very enjoyable game.
I blew up my position at move 5:

1. Rook h1 - WP = Nightrider
1. Pawn d7 - d5
2. Nightrider WP - f4
2. Queen d8 - BP = CardinalRider
3. Rook a1 - WP = SuperBishop
3. Pawn g7 - g6
4. SuperBishop WP - e5
4. Knight g8 - f6
5. SuperBishop e5 x c7 ??
5. CardinalRider BP - g5
6. Knight g1 - f3
6. CardinalRider g5 x c7...

Despite this outcome, I am afraid that the sole advantage of being White
was bound to give me a quick win. (Peter is not so sure.) The Nightrider
can be dropped on c4, threatening King and Rook, or f4, threatening Queen
and Rook. It is forking a fork, so to say.
So, I think that White should be barred from using the Pocket at his
first move. (Peter agrees with me on this.)

This is an excellent game! The pocket allows for many surprises.
I played its zrf many times and I found a very small error in it. The
piece CancellorRider is missing its one step diagonal move.

I concur with Michael Howe. This game is great! The variants section says
that this game could be played with another piece list; I say, LEAVE THE
LIST ALONE! :-) The pieces work fine as they are, and they are pretty easy
to remember.

I too received a preview version of the ZRF. The old version allowed PAWNS
to be dropped directly on the 8th rank, but no other pieces. With that
rule in place, promoting a pawn would take 4 moves (pocket, drop, pocket,
drop promoted piece). Now it takes 5 moves, since the pawn can't be
dropped on the 8th rank. And is it worth 5 tempi to make a pawn a bishop?
I originally thought the promotions would dominate the game... shows you
how much I know! :-) 

This is a must download... or it will be, once the download is available.
:-)