The site has moved to a new server, and there are now some issues to fix. Please report anything needing fixing with a comment to the homepage.

The Chess Variant Pages

[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Reverse Order Earlier
Triumvirate Chess. Uses three Knights. The last remaining opposing Knight must be checkmated as the King. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
John Smith wrote on 2009-12-24 UTC
Still, the power of the King is greatly underestimated. A Commoner is known to be of more value than a Knight, and a Bishop as well. Does this apply to its royal version or are there other factors? One of them in proponency of a superior Knight-King would be that it moves divergent from most other pieces, so it is not so easily countered.

Joe Joyce wrote on 2008-11-22 UTC
As far as easier capture of king or knight, I think it depends on the particular mix of pieces and board you have. I was playing Maxima, and had great trouble catching the king there, which moves like a knight. I remember wishing it only moved like a king. I suspect that 2 things played into that feeling. One is geometry. The smaller standard chessboard coupled with adding 2 pieces, the commoner-kings, that can interdict the knight, blocking its move to an area, makes the royal knight easier to hunt down in Triumverate, I claim. Secondly, that was the only game of Maxima I ever played, so maybe the reason I couldn't catch the knight-king in Maxima is because I'm pretty bad at it. ;-)

John Smith wrote on 2008-11-22 UTCGood ★★★★
I agree with Peter Aronson, regarding the power of a royal Knight. Does Joe Joyce have anything to say?

David Paulowich wrote on 2004-12-03 UTCGood ★★★★
Starting the game with 3 Caesars for each side is a facinating idea. The Crowned Knight image in the Alfaerie graphics is perfect for the Caesar, as it starts the game moving like a knight and (often) ends up moving like a king. But, after playing a game on PBM, I must disagree with the special Caesar-capture move of the Centurion. It discourages the players from using their Caesars to attack, while serving no useful purpose.

Paul DeWitte wrote on 2004-10-30 UTC
Thanks for bringing these points to my attention.
-Technically, three Caesars or two Caesars and a Bishop could mate a lone
Caesar (King), but this would be difficult to do against any opponent who
has even a little chess savvy.
-Yes, a Centurion can capture a Caesar with an initial double pawn move. 
This makes the Centurion a unique threat with respect to the Caesars.
-Castling is not permitted.  En passant captures are not permitted.  Pawn
promotion to a Caesar (Knight) is also not permitted.

Peter Aronson wrote on 2004-10-29 UTCGood ★★★★
This looks pretty interesting, but there are a couple of points: <ol><p><li> May a Centurion making its initial double-move capture a Caesar? <p><li> Is there castling? <p><li> Having played Knightmate (which replaces the King with a royal Knight and the Knights with non-royal Kings), I must disagree with the statement -- 'because the third (remaining) Caesar loses most of his powers upon the capture of the second Caesar, facilitating a quick end' -- as it is usually <em>easier</em> in my experiance to mate a royal Knight than a King (a Queen can mate a royal Knight unaided). </ol>

JKn wrote on 2004-10-29 UTC
Interesting game to play. I wonder about the two new engames (compared to
FIDE chess):

Can a bishop and two knights (without a king) win against a lone king?

What about three knights (without a king) against a lone king?

--J%org Knappen

7 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.