[ 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 IAGO Chess System. http://abstractgamers.org/wiki/iago-chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Singh wrote on 2008-04-07 UTCPoor ★'Calvinball Chess' is a terrible idea. How is one supposed to study a game and improve, gain a sense of accomplish, draw strategic conclusions, compose problems, discuss findings with others, if the rules keep changing? For much the same reason, it seems to me that IAGO Chess, which might as well be called 'Kitchen Sink Chess' is a bad idea. Rich Hutnik wrote on 2008-03-28 UTCGood ★★★★My experiences running IAGO Chess (near B-Class, without the recycling pawn promotion) a bunch of times on Zillions, to give a general feel how play lines up: 1. The non-static opening makes the game feel like it starts out in mid-game providing players a lot of different ways the game can go. It is real hard to say that there is opening lines. The way IAGO Chess works, with both the gatings and drops, is you can have a game where one of the Capablanca pieces (Chancellor, Archbishop) can remain off board until even mid to late game. Yes, it FEELS like regular chess when you start, but then the game can take a bunch of unexpected turns, which makes it good, in my opinion. 3. Yes, the board is a bit more congested, but you still can engage in positional play. Some games have a much more open board, others tighter. There is still a lot of tactical play. Range of pieces drop a bit perhaps, but then this congestion balances the new power in the game. What I will say is that it is more like the midgame lasts longers because more pieces are on the board. Because the power pieces gate into the back row, the back row will be a bit more full. The power pieces don't come out until they are justified to do so. 3. I have seen times where the game is slow plotting, and then everything breaks loose as the pawn structures begin to get blown away. The end game will often end up with very out of balance positions and one or more rook level or higher pieces floating around. More of the pieces also mean your pawn structure will tend to be protected more, creating stronger lines. I will say a byproduct is the end game usually has more pawns in it, with holes in the line. 4. My biased verdict on it is that I believe this works as a solid chess variant, and robust enough for people to make needed tweaks. Of course, it is my game, but it has held up. I would suggest people get ahold of the Zillions adaptation once it is out, and try it themselves, and see what they think. Even if you don't play the AI, do watch some games. It should hopefully be out in a week or two. All goes well that is. If it goes real well, B, C and a version of M-Class (two variants of M-Class that is), should be available. In this the Empress/Amazon will be added into the mix. George Duke wrote on 2008-03-26 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Rich Hutnik mentions zones to introduce pieces within 64 squares. One meaning of 'zones' would be like F. V. Morley's or Sibahi's. Morley's book 'My One Contribution to Chess' from 1940's adds two corridors 6 squares each along the sides, making 76 squares, but there are no pieces there in the array -- modest and undisruptive like elementary back-rank 'gating'. Now Abdul-Rahman Sibahi[unlike his 64-square Energizer] adds similar zones, only 4 squares each behind the initial set-up, making 72 squares, to accomodate RN, BN. Under 'Falcon Chess Variants Several' Preset at Game Courier is 'Falcon Chess with Chancellor & Cardinal'. So, before Seirawan Chess, and other than Betza's Tutti-Frutti and Karakus' Perfect, is attempt to put RN and BN on fewer than 80 squares, like that one approved for Sibahi. Actually there are RN & BN on < 64 squares as well, if we can recall some of them(Gilman may have done this, certainly some Gilman's have RN, BN at 64-79). Another CV with ongoing drops is Altair. There Roberto Lavieri accepted my characterization of the vertical-translation capabability of about half Lavieri's piece-types as particularizing drops, since they go to any square of one other rank(3 away), regardless the piece's inherent movement; but they are already on board. Interesting game Altair. In a sense, it is held up as one of the all-time top 3 in mentioning Rococo, Centennial, and Altair together. Of course, a few years ago, we had Switching Chess in there, not so well liked anymore, partly because already invented, it turned out, excepting King switching. Really why would not Switching Chess solve all problems to do away with overuse of rote practice? It has 64 squares and would be easy even to switch one piece over to an adjacent occupied square, and instead an off-board piece onto that arrival square, with the piece thus substituted leaving the board to make room for the probably-new type(other than RNBQ) in regular move by such 'Off-Board Switching', according to availability. As if combining Pocket Piece with Switching practice on same and sure 64 squares. 3 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.