[ 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 Beyond Omega. Large abstract variant with radial and oblique pieces requiring rotation. (15x15, Cells: 225) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Flowerman wrote on 2010-02-20 UTCExcellent ★★★★★So why not make game with entire greech alphabet? :) John Smith wrote on 2009-01-25 UTCGood ★★★★Nicely geometric, as Omega, but not as minimalist and a bit harder to visualize. I don't see the difference between an Alpha and Lambda and wonder if there are opposition rules. George Duke wrote on 2008-09-21 UTCGood ★★★★I decided to change my original rating since Maura's is so subtly good and also running across Betza's comparable ''Ultimate Ultima.'' Though one more Omega is more than enough, two more piece-types after the same fashion are more playable. Maura would okay that the way he workably brought Modern to over-the-board at Spain, Mexico and Puerto Rico. Maura's Modern's 9x9 also is the acknowledged model for ChessBoardMath3 Baseball Chess. George Duke wrote on 2008-09-10 UTCPoor ★Gilman makes no mention of name of Omega inventor Gabriel Vicente Maura, although mentioning Duniho's name. [The Latin American Omega Chess is named two decades earlier than commercial Canadian Omega.] This BOC is stealing too much of Maura's concept in the core game Omega Chess from year 1974, although at least acknowledging it. Gilman's entire Rules section reads ''Rules, as Omega.'' That's it for the rules of ''Beyond Omega Chess.'' Inappropriate warping enlargement of Maura's game suitable only for a Comment under Maura's Omega by commonsense standards that would prevail away from CVPage. Beyond Omega is not being appropriate of separate write-up attributable to Gilman laying claim to be ''inventor.'' Gilman attempts rationalization defensively in his very first paragraph by citing Duniho's Storm the Ivory Tower. Copying as it does Smess, Storm the Ivory Tower is also unfortunate variety of self-acknowledged plagiarism. Sure there are fine lines. If either Beyond Omega or Storm the Ivory Tower were presented as satire or humour, they could be tolerable or acceptable. Instead, these ''artworks'' are shown by respective authors Gilman and Duniho as improvements of earlier products Omega and Smess. We now know there could be ''umpteen'' thousands of ''variants'' of any fundamental underlying Rules-set. Why not just put personal adaptations, intrinsically the same as prior art on some basic level, in Comment or two under the original work? Especially since they are not going to be played anyway. And even if having pretty good idea of one's own -- as Gilman has here with ''Alpha-Lambda'' representing ''incomplete'' Knight or Camel according to orientation. Sorry, Charles, it's not enough novelty, Gabriel got there first; and it is Maura's CV not Gilman's. 4 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.