[ 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 Overprotection Chess. If an attacked piece is more often defended than it is attacked, it gains extra powers. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]gnohmon wrote on 2002-04-10 UTCExcellent ★★★★★You have trapped me and won the game of game-making! You suggested recursive, and I said 'sure, okay', and then you hoisteded me with me own petard by pointing out a most ingenious paradox, more ingenious than Doctors Einstein and Schweitzer. I am bereft, like an apprentice to Pilate. Where can I find an mp3 of busy editorial beavers whistling the 'Happy Editor' song as they undo a previous change? gnohmon wrote on 2002-04-09 UTCExcellent ★★★★★A Pawn or piece must be attacked in order to be overprotected. I said that, right? 'and dynamic' ... 'where checkmating the opponent could also checkmate you!' means that the enemy K is defended several times (but of course not attacked) so that when you attack the enemy K it becomes overprotected and gives check to your nearby King. I could have made that clearer, right? But you're correct, even the closest reading of this doesn't really say whether it's recursive. Yes, why not recursive, gosh darn it and gosh darn it again? If you could overprotect an unattacked piece, this would 'merely' be a new (and perhaps an excellent) form of Relay Chess. So, should add a line that the powers gained by an overprotected piece can be used to overprotect another piece. Should add a line 'therefore you can destroy your opponent's overprotection by moving your attacker away'. And should add the explanation of how giving check[mate] can check[mate] yourself. Better now? Peter Aronson wrote on 2002-04-08 UTCExcellent ★★★★★This looks like fun! I particularly like that once you overprotect a Pawn by two (easy enough -- just take an unattacked Pawn and give it two supporters), suddenly it captures forward and to the side. <p> I find myself wondering if overprotection is calculated recursively. That is, when determining overprotection, is overprotection taken into account? <p> Consider the following: <blockquote> White Pawns at <b>a3</b>, <b>b4</b> and <b>c3</b>; <p> Black Pawns at <b>a6</b>, <b>b5</b> and <b>c6</b>. </blockquote> Assume white's move. Can the white Pawn on <b>b4</b> capture the black Pawn on <b>b5</b>? If you apply white's Wazir capture first, then it can (since it is overprotected by two, black not having a Wazir capture as it is only overprotected by one), if you apply black's Wazir capture first, it can not (since then the white Pawn will only be overprotected by one). Curious, no? 3 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.