[ 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 ItemLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier Armies of Faith 1: The Dawn of Civilisation. The first in of a series of 3d variants themed on various religions of history. (9x9x3, Cells: 243) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]George Duke wrote on 2007-07-05 UTCPoor ★Changing the board to a superset of '10x10 board' (into 3d)we think now violates USPatent5690334(and other foreign) by legal doctrine of equivalents. I previously requested Gilman email me to tailor series appropriately. The solution is to remove Falcon from Armies of Faith or brief e-mail discussion. I assume removal should be no problem because in original text of AOF, a paragraph now deleted Gilman asks for approval, or without it he said he would simply use Falcon-Hunter, or something else. Who can remember when AOF text undergoes continual revision. Greg Strong wrote on 2007-06-06 UTCBelowAverage ★★I rate this below average, not because of any reference to the Falcon, but because it is just another random, untested game. Charles Gilman posts games more than some people change their underwear. And many of his 'games' have dozens of built-in variants. He may well have the title of most prolific inventor at this point, but it doesn't mean anything when most of the games have never been played even once. He doesn't even bother to make a Game Courier preset or Zillions-Of-Games ZRF. It is not difficult to spew out random crap. And this game is proved to be even more of a spur-of-the-moment invention by the fact that Charles Gilman, who prides himself on clever English usage in the naming of his games and pieces, can't even spell 'Civilization' correctly in the title. Charles, please stop spaming this site with your random ideas. This should be a forum for ideas that have some thought and playtesting behind them. If you are determined to post hundreds and hundreds of variants, may I suggest that you buy your own web space in which to do it. Anonymous wrote on 2007-06-06 UTCBelowAverage ★★To the laugher, Sorry, Falcon is not lame under Ralph Betza's 2003 definition. These terms, multi-path, four fundamental chess pieces etc., do not mean whatever you want them to mean. There is no use of Lame prior to 2003 for Chess, and Betza uses it for radial movements. George Duke wrote on 2007-06-05 UTCPoor ★Very poor description of Falcon from Falcon Chess (1992), USP5690334. See Comments under another oddball game Horus(2004). Falcon is not 'lame' and invention of Falcon precedes 'Bison' in a game by twelve years, so Bison would be an offshoot, or corruption, of Falcon, not vice versa. Etc. 4 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.