[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Rated Comments for a Single ItemEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later Rolling Kings. Kings must move along a predetermined path. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]George Duke wrote on 2005-01-21 UTCExcellent ★★★★★This is so suitable a fit for '32-Turn Contest', it's almost as if someone invented the game and then made up a contest to go with it. Not really how it happened to be designed, Rolling Kings' drawback is in being more like a study than a game to play, as paucity of Game Courier scores shows. Here you learn what 'bustrophaedonically' means, that 'oxlike' is not the same as 'bullheaded'. George Duke wrote on 2008-11-25 UTCExcellent ★★★★★32. In abeyance for four years, the question was how to assure 32 turns at most. Roll the King along a set path toward the centre. This is right up there with Rococo. I was just being overly-generous with Rococo out of courtesy. Rococo is a tough sell because of nondisplacement capture. Rolling Kings is standard equipment and rules up to the outrageous mutator, removing it from Track One. ''The Queen, Rook, Bishop and Knight all move as they do in Orthodox Chess,'' to the relief of any GMs looking. In perfect seriousness, the King rolling is real perpetual nuisance for both sides; and that is the one you have to checkmate, or capture, not the Mock King. We learn meaning of BOUSTROPHEDONICALLY if nothing else. If they never started using oxen that way, we would not be in the climate-extinctions scenario today, staying rational hunter-gatherers. 2 comments displayedEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ LaterPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.