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 ]

Rated Comments 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: 1998-12-04
 Author: Hans L. Bodlaender. Inventor: A. S. Yurgelevich. Chess-Battle. War variant from the Soviet-Union, 1933. (12x12, Cells: 128) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Daniil Frolov wrote on 2013-12-28 UTCGood ★★★★
A little behindhand addition to the discussion of the headuarters capturing capabilities.
Joe Joyce made quite logical assumption that headquarters was able to capture. But there is a following question: what are it's capturing limitations?
I also heard opinion that headquarters was not able to capture, because in this case it's supposed that it can capture any piece, but Yurgelevich tried to make this game as realistic as possible for chess-like game, and commander can't be "Rambo with bazooka".
My own assumption: headquarters can capture with same limitations as infantry (can't capture the tank). But in this case another question follows: does it capture only in same directions as soldiers, and can it make double move on white squares?
Since rule about double step is said only about infantry, while about headquarters it's only said that it can move as king, it's logical that it can move as king only. But on the other hand - double step rule probably implied that some places in real live (especially in war conditions) have more practicable paths or better transport connection than the others. So, why headquarters can't use same ways, if this game is that realistic?

George Duke wrote on 2007-10-22 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Joe Joyce wrote under 'Proliferation' 19.Sept.07, ''Personally, I don't like rifle capture pieces and gimmicky pieces like planes. So right off the top I think it is a Poor game.'' --about this Chess-Battle. So, clearly Joyce dislikes Charles Daniels' recent Flying Bombers(airplane-like) too. Agreeing with Joyce about those two groups of pieces, we do not care for Fugue, for example, utilizing Rifle or 1996-patented Quantum's rifle or Schmittberger's either by the standard of playability. However, despite personal taste the latter should be credited its fine originality for year 1981. Likewise, Joyce's evaluation of Chess-Battle should not be poorly based on one criterion, the reaction against Rifle-types. Chess-Battle dates remarkably from year 1933, before 90% of CVs existed, and has many original and appealing features. They include first use of triple compound leaper, distinction between jumping over enemy or friendly pieces, and unique mix of short- and long-range, to name only three. The 'Rifle' gun and machine-gun are not the entire game and with imagination could be cut back or eliminated in personally-suited variations.

George Duke wrote on 2005-01-22 UTCGood ★★★★
In this 1933 game from Russia, Cavalry is (Knight+Camel), but over enemy pieces it requires a specific pathway, only one being allowed. Both (N+C), or 'Gnu', and (N+Zebra), or 'Gazelle', have been used sometimes under varying names, both compounds about ten times in Pritchard's 'ECV'. Only once in Pritchard is there a piece that is (N+C+Z), a triple-compound leaper. Cazaux's 2001 Gigachess here in CVP re-uses that thirty-year-old (N+C+Z)leaper calling it Buffalo. Gilman's 2004 Great Herd is apparently the first ever use of (C+Z), or 'Bison', in a game.

Anonymous wrote on 2003-06-17 UTCGood ★★★★

4 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.