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: 2003-02-19
 By Ralph  Betza. Polypiece Chess. Each time a piece moves, all pieces of that type on both sides change their move. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
LCC wrote on 2003-02-21 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
My suggestion was slightly different from Phased Polypiece Chess. Suppose
FIDE armies. Suppose a list like this: R -> N -> B -> Q -> NNZZ -> R that
applies to all pieces of both sides.

After white makes any movement with one such piece, all rooks on the board
become knights, all knights become bishops, all bishops become queens and
the queens become zebra+knightriders, just as an example.

A game like this would, of course, be overly complicated.

It has occurred to me that this is a highly cool way to make
limited-number-of-movements chess, just by using a list that <i>does not
loop</i>. The last element of the list would be an immobile piece. This
way, a player would watch his army be slowly reduced to immobility, kind
of piece after kind of piece. Such a game should better not have a King
and be played for stalemate.

John Lawson wrote on 2003-02-20 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Isn't this kind of like Peter's Chess with Cyclical Armies?
And I like the idea of polypiece Ultima or Rococo.  How about Polypiece
Optima?  Or Nemoroth?

Peter Aronson wrote on 2003-02-20 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Immobilizers? How about Polypiece Ultima or Polypiece Rococo -- the way a piece moves doesn't change, but how it captures changes . . .

Antoine Fourrière wrote on 2003-02-19 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
I believe it would be very useful for Immobilizers when they are mixed with Orthochess pieces. A Queen/Immobilizer or an ImmobilizerW/ImmobilizerF (with ImmobilizerW paralyzing enemy pieces which are adjacent by a side and ImmobilizerF paralyzing enemy pieces which are adjacent by a corner) should lead to a more balanced game. If each side had two such pieces, it would bring an exit for frozen immobilizers. (If each side had only one of them, it would be much easier to free frozen pieces, but that would already be true if only the moving piece changed its path.)

LCC wrote on 2003-02-19 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Very good!... what if all pieces (except likely the King and pawns) shared the same list, but some were 'ahead' a few steps, and every move could change the whole board?... indeed a great source of inspiration. Great idea, Mr. Betza.

5 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.