[ 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 Chess Jester. 4-player variant with two new pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]nikelir wrote on 2006-09-12 UTCExcellent ★★★★★ ssbornik wrote on 2006-09-06 UTCExcellent ★★★★★ cirkyl wrote on 2006-09-05 UTCGood ★★★★ kipetok wrote on 2006-07-10 UTCExcellent ★★★★★ snymrik wrote on 2006-07-02 UTCExcellent ★★★★★ geroin9l wrote on 2006-06-21 UTCGood ★★★★ Matthew Scholle wrote on 2004-07-13 UTCRegarding the comment from J Andrew Lipscomb. We have looked very closely at all aspects of our game. Including the value of this piece. We based the value not only on the power, but the fact that only one Jester(Camel) per army is present. Having only one Jester makes the piece somewhat sneaky, you have to keep you eye on it. Also, The queen and prince are the only other pieces that are singled out. All other chessmen have a copart Rooks Bishops Knights. And these pieces are rated between 3 and 5. Although I do see Andrews point. I have also argued this. J Andrew Lipscomb wrote on 2004-07-03 UTCPoor ★I can't comment particularly on the quality of the game (not having played it), but ya gotta wonder about inventors who think a Camel (which its Jester is) is the equal of a Rook... 8 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.