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: 2008-06-12
 By Graeme C Neatham. King's Guard Chess. Pawns move like kings and only Pawns may capture. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
George Duke wrote on 2008-06-14 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Left out of Chess Variant Page so far, the greatest odd-Chess exemplar of all time, Sam Loyd (1841-1911) would like this game. It reminds me of ''Excelsior,'' published 'London Era' 1861, the greatest individual Problem of all time by far. One is a Problem following OrthoChess Rules exclusively, whilst this is just another CVPage Rules-set. How can such two different elements be alike but by imagination? Here there is expression actually to want to play it, so nice work! The tie-in to two apparently disparate works, a game and a Problem, with different Rules, is *Assist*. Check out ''Excelsior'' at Wikipedia or someplace. Most CVs evoke some prior similarity, but we do not recall requiring two attacks to take (suggesting family of games, but forget about that). So simple idea is not previously considered and, therefore, please credit novelty to King's Guard -- being itself rare in CVPage by the late aughts. Are these then the last of the good fairy Chess ideas, so we can have ruined inventiveness in Rules altogether for our descendants, and no one bothers with CVs by the 1920's[2020's]? Let's get back to work. And elegant King's Guard coming out of North American inventor, is the source by geography and culture only one factor in appreciation?

Rich Hutnik wrote on 2008-06-13 UTCGood ★★★★
I have not had a chance to play this, but reading over the rules, I would give this a thumb's up. It does look interesting.

Alfred Pfeiffer wrote on 2008-06-13 UTCGood ★★★★
Why should a side without pawns lose the game?  In chess the game is 
lost usually by the loss of royal pieces (king).  I assume the king 
could resist against his capturing in many cases, so a draw seems 
possible.  Also you could try to win without pawns by stalemating 
the opponent's pieces.

Gary Gifford wrote on 2008-06-13 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
This appears to be a very good CV! I really admire the capturing concept and the need to coordinate and defend from double attacks. It is not often that we see something profoundly different. The closest thing that comes to mind [to me in regard to the guards)is the dual-capture mechanism which is seen in Robert Abbott's Coordinator piece {from the game of Ultima), and also used in Maxima by Roberto Lavieri. But your variant is different enough to give it a very 'original' feel... and overall, of course, the game, in total, is very different from those games.

Great job!


Michael Nelson wrote on 2008-06-13 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
I really like this concept--it's not precisely like anything I've seen, fundamentally simple, yet makes for a very unorthodox game.

So far as I know, Graeme isn't channeling me--perhaps I should channel him and get my creative juices flowing again.

Jianying Ji wrote on 2008-06-12 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Horray for the unique mechanism! (well some joe joyce's large variants has enabling pieces that allow other pieces to move or capture, but still that is very different from this variant) As for computer play, it does alter drastically the evaluation function, and depending on the subtlety and complexity of the function, the play will differ widely in quality. It certainly would spread it out some.

6 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.