The Chess Variant Pages
Custom Search

[ 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
This item is a game information page
It belongs to categories: Orthodox chess, 
It was last modified on: 2020-11-03
 By Zhedric  Meneses. 16Chess. Game with 4 royal pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-12-18 UTC


I think I'm going to change pieces a bit rn

The Unicorn now moves like Bison(Camel+Zebra) instead of Gnu(Camel+Knight)

also, there are now 5 "major" pieces, the 4 being the royals and one that moves like a Squirrel(Knight+Alfil+Dabbaba) whose royal name is Sovereign

basically, you have to choose 4 of them to be the royals and then the remaining one is placed where the Zebra was(yes, the Zebra is replaced by a non royal "major" piece)

lastly, as an optional rule, you may not have the same non royal "major" piece

I'm not going to update the page for now since it's night rn

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-19 UTC

Hello, I know I'm already posting too many comments on this, I just wanna fix the game

While currently playtesting the game on Zillions, I'm thinking of ideas to try weaken the riders so that the game's more "fair" or smth

I'm thinking of making it a part-hopper, limit their range, or replace them entirely but I dunno yet, I just need ideas to weaken them

EDIT: ok, instead of "fixing" the riders, I'm going to try to update the rules

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-19 UTC

wait, giraffe is used for 4,2 or 3,2 leaper? i thought it's used for 4,1 leaper

timurthelenk wrote on 2020-11-13 UTC

Of course every creator has the freedom of choosing the names he prefers. So, just for information in case that feedback could be interesting:

  • Why not calling the Knight simply a Nightrider as this is the most used name for this move?
  • The Unicorn is better known as the Gnu or Wildedebeest. Unicorn could refer to something else.
  • The use of Phoenix is very good, that name coming from Chu Shogi. Then, I would suggest to use Kyrin instead of Giraffe for consistency. Giraffe is already used for 4,2 leaper, or for 3,2 leaper, or even in Giraffe Chess (a variant popular nowadays in India) for 3,1 leaper. I know that the Kyrin, a mythical Japanese beast has probably been inspired by the Giraffe, but it looks definitely different as beer amateurs can judge :=)
  • Duke for KN could be replaced by Page, a name proposed by others. Centaur is also used. Duke has been used by others (like Renn chess) for other things.

Fergus Duniho wrote on 2020-11-12 UTC

I was just looking at the options available for defining win or loss conditions in Zillions-of-Games, and I think your best bet would be to use a conjunction of several absolute-config goals. If you make a zone of the entire board, and you check whether there is no instance of each piece type, you may be able to check whether the board is free of royals or free of non-royals. Here's an example of how this might work for one piece:

(absolute-config (not (any-piece Knight)) (board-zone))

I have not tested this or worked out how the whole condition would work. So, just think of this as a lead and do some more investigating. Since you have two main conditions, your entire win or loss condition would have to be a disjunction. I have not tested whether disjunctive goals will work. Also, you should figure out whether it will work best as a loss condition or as a win condition. Either one will do, and you don't need both.

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-12 UTC


I tried to program this game to Zillions but I can't figure how to set the win condition

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-10 UTC

I will be honest, No I haven't. I just don't know how to program it to something like Zillions or Courier but I understand the concern and will update the rules once I have actually playtested it

also by "only royals left", I meant by No Non-Royals Remain(meaning only Queen, Cardinal, Marshall, and/or Duke remaining) and it's after the move is made though I will probably change to "Only Royals and few(haven't yet decided on an actual number) Other Pieces Remain"

H. G. Muller wrote on 2020-11-10 UTC

Have you really playtested this? I would not be surprised if this variant is impossible to win against a player that has decided from the beginning that he doesn't want to lose. A Queen is almost impossible to catch; IIRC you need at least 4 Queens to do that on 8x8, and without doubt it will be worse on 10x10. Of course you have the rule that if there are only royals it is already game end, and the royal count decides. But what if a player keeps a Q + R? The opponent might need an overwhelming amount of material to catch the Rook, an advantage that would be almost impossible to acquire against a reasonable player.

BTW, it was not quite clear to me what it means to have 'only royals left'. Does that apply to both players, or just one? And is the condition applied before or after the move? I.e. if I have only Q+R, and the Q protects the R, and the opponent has nothing but 2 royals... Can he then capture my Rook with one of these royals and claim the 2:1 advantage, or can I recapture with my Q to make it a 1-vs-1 draw?

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-10 UTC

Tbh, I've been thinking to do something about the royals something like

a. modify the royals

b. add royals then make the player choose 4 royals out of all of them

c. reduce the number of royals in the game

and/or d. weaken the royals in their first move

I've been thinking of doing b but I'm not sure yet

Zhedric Meneses wrote on 2020-11-10 UTC

Hmmmmm... I think you're right about the last line. It is better for the riders to be in the last rank so the "minor" pieces can develop first but for some reason I haven't thought about it when making the setup, Woopsies!

Ben Reiniger wrote on 2020-11-09 UTC

This looks promising to me.

Having such mobile royal pieces (even limited to two sliding, which I overlooked at first) may lead to indecisive games. I think your suggestion for winning after capturing 2-3 royals is a good one.

The short-range phoenix and giraffe maybe would be better to start up one rank? And the rook, bishop, knightrider back?

11 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.