[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Rated Comments for a Single Item
Great concept! The planar pieces seem a bit too powerful for a 3D version. However, I think they would be more useful in a 4D game. I think the dimensions of movement of a piece should not excede half the number of dimensions of the field.
<p>I have been playing around with the idea of a '4D8L' type game, but it now occurs to me that a 4D field would be too 'open' for a family of 'knight-hoppers' and 'line-movers' alone, even if there were 512 pieces and 512 pawns per side. So the concept of 'planar' pieces my help balance the 4D game.
Interesting, though I think there should be no more than 50-60 pieces per side. I have been trying to design something similar to this while avoiding the almost inevitable problem of too many pieces. It may be a good idea to add linear jumping pieces to supplement the others you have devised.
Excellent graphics. I finally got to appreciate the starting position (and I just realized that there's no Prince in the starting setup.) However, I still don't think this game is playable for humans. Not because of it's complexity, but because of the many piece types. I made an attempt to simplify this game, a whole lot, to make it more playable and closer to Standard two dimensional Chess. I called it the Tower's Game because it's played on a tower-like board.
For me the planar pieces are what makes this game what it is. The Towers Game is just another variant using the same pieces as a good many 3d variants (including a couple of my own). A front rank dominated by planar pieces in number rather than just strength might be interesting. An interesting way to increase the range of planar pieces is to consider the Scientist a compound piece, as it covers two quite different kinds of plane, and the University and Spy as triple compounds. As the names seem to be the only ones for planar pieces I will stick with them and try to follow the theme, so let's call the Scientist a compound of the Theorist (where the diagonals are at right angles) and the Technician (where they are at 60°). For the additional compounds of one but not both Scientist components I suggest Base+Theorist=Study, Base+Technician=Laboratory, Theorist+Reporter=Reviewer, Technician+Reporter=Printer, Base+Theorist+Reporter=Library, and Base+Technician+Reporter=Press.
I was thinking about this the other day. If a Rook in 2D chess is defined as a piece which controls the whole line it's sitting on, then perhaps a rook in 3D chess should be defined so that it controls the whole plain. But I was having trouble thinking how to define it. Your definition of 'Making too rook moves in the same plain fixes this problem by allowing it to be blocked, etc. This way you can CheckMate the king too. You can't force check-mate with only a 3D Queen. Remembering all the different varieties of night moves I think will be the hardest thing with this. In 4D Chess then, a extending out this way, would make 3 Rook moves with-in the same 'cube.' (Obviously 6 of the 8 cubes will be distrorted in the 3D projection we play in.) TRacy Tracy
6 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.