[ 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 More10. Chessvariant on a board with 10 squares. (2x5, Cells: 10) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Mason Green wrote on 2005-03-07 UTCGood ★★★★This is probably one of the best games that could be made on a 2*5 board. Another idea would be to allow pieces to use the line intersections as well as the squares, and transfer between them somehow. There are 18 line intersections, however...and 28 cells doesn't sound very good for the contest. I do have one complaint, though--it has to do with the 'repetition' rule. I generally don't like this rule, and here's why. Keeping track of ALL the positions that have been used up so far is very time-consuming in a real life game (though thankfully not in a computer match), because you have to write down everything as you go along. That's why I don't like Philosopher's Chess very much, even though it won a contest. It's not that bad with more10, which probably will be fairly short, but I still prefer games without repetition rules. Peter Aronson wrote on 2005-02-26 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I'm not entirely sure this is a successful game, but I'm not sure anything much better could be done on such a small board, and this is a very creditable attempt. I like the extra branching added by the piece changing on movement. Charles Gilman wrote on 2005-02-26 UTCGood ★★★★This is certainly an interesting use of the 'Gold' directions, with the shortage of files leaving some intriguing unanswered questions about the sideways and diagonal moves. 3 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.