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: 2016-12-05
 By Jose  Carrillo. Latrunculi XXI. A 21st century variant on an ancient Chess-like game of the Roman empire. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Jose Carrillo wrote on 2018-05-27 UTC

Thanks Kevin for your comment and your rating.

Let meknow if you want to play a game!

Cheers!


Kevin Pacey wrote on 2018-03-01 UTCExcellent ★★★★★

This 2 piece type variant seems rather simple, deceptively so, and yet there is so much room for strategy and tactics.


Jose Carrillo wrote on 2017-12-21 UTC

Thanks Erik for the very interesting question. I do understand the question.

Rule 1c states that "it's illegal for a player to immobilize his own Dux".

Since the move you speak of opens a new path for the Dux to move, the Dux would not be immobilized, and therefore it would be a legal move; just like the Go rule where capture has priority over suicide that you refer to.

Thanks for the question. I will update the rules with a few illustration diagrams to clarify this specific situation.

 

 

 

 


erik wrote on 2017-12-20 UTC

I have a question about a point of rules that seems not to be clarified, if I well understood and not missed anything.

Can a player whose the Dux is in check play in a way to block his last open path (which normally results in a checkmate), if this move performs a Push & Crush attack or a Phalanx that captures in the same time the opposite surrounding enemy Soldier, so that the Dux has a new open path? (In a somewhat similar manner to the Go rule where capture has priority over suicide.)

I hope my question is clear enough.


Kevin Pacey wrote on 2016-08-20 UTC

Hi Jose

I got your email invite to play a game of Latr. XXI with you. At the moment I'm just mulling over the idea of playing online games once again (I've only ever played 2 games, both rather chess-like). Latr. XXI looks surprisingly complex for a game that has just 2 piece types. If I do make a comeback to online play, soon, I'd prefer to start with seemingly simpler variant(s), although I've noticed a number of people have tried Latr. XXI already, so I guess it's quite playable, and it's possible I'll try a game of it farther ahead in the year to come if I do become accustomed to (slow) online (chess variant) play (besides getting my feet wet at some point with any number of variants which seem truly alien to a regular & veteran tournament chess player like me).

I'm curious if you too have tried Canadian tournament chess play (i.e. been in Chess Federation of Canada rated events).

Kevin


Jose Carrillo wrote on 2016-08-20 UTC

Thanks for the feedback Fergus.

I have done some cleanup and reorganization as requested.

Let me know if further changes are required.

Thanks.

 


Fergus Duniho wrote on 2016-08-06 UTC

This seems to be a very creative, well thought-out game. I made some minor edits, but this page would also benefit from some reorganization, which I'll leave in the hands of the author. Some parts of the Introduction, Setup, and Rules belong in the Notes section. The Introduction should be short and to the point. The Setup section should stop with the setup. Details on Notation should be moved to Notes. The Rules section should be briefer, leaving details about strategy for Notes. Right now, there is too much non-essential content to wade through to learn how to play this game. For the Introduction, Setup, Pieces, and Rules sections, brevity should be the rule. Save elaboration and tangents for the Notes. Also, try to keep the page short enough to read in one sitting. Let me know when you have fixed the page up, and I will look at it again.


Jose Carrillo wrote on 2016-07-31 UTC

Hello CVP Editors,

Can I please get one of you to review this variant? The page has been posted for over a month, and it hasn't been reviewed yet. Thanks in advance.


8 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.