[ 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 Pretentious Chess. All Pieces can move as and demote to a Knight. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Gary Gifford wrote on 2007-02-26 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I found this game to be very thought provoking and enjoyed it very much. I think it plays well and can be very tricky and exciting. It is a great game that certainly has the players always thinking about Knight moves, in addition to standard chess moves. Well done, Adrian! Greg Strong wrote on 2006-12-29 UTCRegarding the previous question about the value of the pieces, it is always tricky to know with games with off-the-beaten-path rules such as this one. It appears to me, however, that the values should mostly stay the same since they have all been augmented in the same way, with the obvious exception being the Knight. The Knight is not augmented, but is still a good piece because it can move as a Knight without being demoted. I would say that the values remain the same, except that the Knight is about half a pawn weaker. And, when a piece moves as a Knight and is demoted, it becomes the same value as the Knight. I assign no value to the King whether or not it has been demoted - as a royal piece, its value is infinite. Adrian Alvarez de la Campa wrote on 2006-05-23 UTCI have been wondering about piece values in this game since there are some interesting exchanges possible (e.g. Bishop takes Knight via demotion to Knight). I made a ZRF, but the Zillions values seem way off. For example, the 'pretentious' Queen is valued at about 29,000 compared to a full-fledged Amazon at only 19,000. Does anyone have a better idea of what pretentious pieces are worth? David Paulowich wrote on 2006-03-08 UTCComments to the 'Knightmate' page state that Royal Knight and Queen can force mate against Royal Knight. It usually takes a Royal Knight and two of the weaker pieces (Rook, Bishop, Commoner) to force mate.  This comment refers to Kings in this game that have lost their ability to move like Kings and now move like Knights. This game prohibits a King from entering (or staying in) check. So as long as you move your Queen about the board like a Queen, it will affect your opponent's King like an Amazon. Adrian Alvarez de la Campa wrote on 2006-03-08 UTCYes, I have tested the game with Zillions and because all the pieces have additional Knight moves and Pawns are promotable to Queen+Knight pieces, giving the King a Knight move as well does not make him much more difficult to mate. And in fact a lone Queen+Knight can still mate the Centaur-King. Tony Quintanilla wrote on 2006-03-07 UTCGood ★★★★A Royal Knight is an interesting idea. The King has remained mostly unchanged because of the difficulty in checkmating a more powerful piece. However, a Royal Knight may be viable. Have you tested this? Adrian Alvarez de la Campa wrote on 2006-03-06 UTCTrue. I thought these graphics were perfect for this variant since visually it almost looks like the Knight is hiding behind the major Pieces, waiting to jump out on its own, and I modified the Marshall piece to match the others. Fergus Duniho wrote on 2006-03-06 UTCThis is just to clarify the credits. The graphics are based on the pieces I made from Armando Marroquin's Chess Motif font. My Marshall piece puts the Knight in front of the Rook, not the Rook in front of the Knight, as has been done here. Adrian Alvarez de la Campa wrote on 2006-03-06 UTCAnd let me also thank you and the other editors of these pages for your work. I have long admired the site. Adrian Alvarez de la Campa wrote on 2006-03-06 UTCThat's right. Also coincidentally, I experimented with using a Dragon (in place of a Knight) which demotes to a Pawn, just as in your game! I may include this variation when I post the ZRF. Another one of my variants with 'potential' pieces is Undecided Chess. Anyhow, thanks for commenting! Peter Aronson wrote on 2006-03-06 UTCGood ★★★★Interesting. Aside from the King, this resembles a more restrained version of my Potential/Demotion Chess. 11 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.