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
Knight Court. Mate the knight with three pieces per player on a three by three board. (3x3, Cells: 9) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
George Duke wrote on 2016-10-12 UTC

Nine squares and in the few comments all ratings Excellent, but this is certainly busted right? Here are rules of Wittman's Tile Chess still marketed almost twenty years later in Steve Jackson Games:

Tile_Chess.


Daniil Frolov wrote on 2010-06-04 UTC
Here is my 'Chinese' variant of this game:

hcg
---
GCH

G - general; C - cannon; H - horse. All pieces moves like in Xiang-qi. General is royal and it is not allowed to share rank or file with opponent's general if there is no piece between them. Of course, there is no palace (where it supposed to be?). Captured pieces can be dropped as in original Knight court (that is, without changing owner), but with one restriction: horse may not be dropped to center square. First player cannot start with general's move (i think, moving general on first move will give advantage). As in normal Xiang-qi, stalemating opponent also wins (note that here stalemate is possible not only by making position, in wich general will be captured after any move, but also by blocking opponent's pieces). I played this, but still not sure, is it playable (but game was well). It, of course, might be worse than original Knight court.

Flowerman wrote on 2010-03-04 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
At first sight it could appear, what game is too simple and easy like
tic-tac-toe. But when you'll play it, you will understand, what it's
wrong: game is very interesting! By the way, maybe, change starting
position and use another piece as king? I don't know what with rook, but,
i think, it worth to try bishop, but they must start on squares of
different colors: if they will start from same position, as in this game,
they will be unable to move at all, and if they both will be in corners,
both will be able to reach only 2 squares. Maybe, bishop, wich starts on
corner squares, have more chances, but another can be given by stronger
pieces or stronger starting position.

By the way, it's not smallest possible playable game: there is game on 6
squares, with archbishop (N+B) as king. And even this game is probably not
the smallest playable... But, maybe this game with 6 squares is smallest
possible playable game, where all pieces are on board in beggining.

hbackslash7 wrote on 2009-12-13 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Very fun to play. Seems as though the first side to check has a small advantage.

Oh, and Fool's Mate is 2: 1. Bc2 Bxc2 2. Bvb2# ('v' being a drop)

Overall, great diversion :D

Jeremy Good wrote on 2007-08-02 UTC
The object of this game is to checkmate the knight. Also, the knight can't capture the bishop because that would mean putting himself in check.

Thomas Gruber wrote on 2007-08-02 UTC

Please excuse my lack of understanding. I'm still new to chess variants. To me it seems the starting position is already a checkmate,as the white knight can capture the black bishop. Where is my thinking error?

Kind regards

Thomas


6 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.