[ 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 Rook Mania. Game where all pieces have different sorts of Rook-like moves. (7x7, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Flowerman wrote on 2010-03-08 UTCGood ★★★★Is there game like this, but with diagonal moves instead orthogonal? Carlos MartÃn-F. wrote on 2003-06-30 UTCExcellent ★★★★★I only wonder if 2 bullets per pistol are not too much, maybe just one shot would be OK. Roberto Lavieri wrote on 2003-06-09 UTCGood ★★★★I have briefly play-tested the game, it is interesting and should be ranked as 'good', nevertheless, there is an observation: Basilisk seems to be extremely powerful on a board of 43 squares. Playability must be better on a longer board. Antoine Fourrière wrote on 2003-04-10 UTCGood ★★★★The game is certainly interesting - I welcome in particular the Basilisk and the Coordinator -, but it may need refinement with the help of Zillions, which is not good at evaluating capture modes, however. (Zillions also believes a Pao to be worth a Rook, when XiangQi masters think it is worth only half a Rook, though on a less crowded board.) I believe you're right to limit the custodian capture to a pair of Pawns. Robert Abbott has long complained that the Pincer Pawns are too strong in Ultima, whose armies are certainly stronger than they are in Orthochess or in your game. Still, if the capturing force of one Pincer Pawn amounts to nothing, the capturing force of two Pincer Pawns is also less than threatening, and the players would decline to capture the last pair of Pincer Pawns. Robert Abbott also wanted to use a pair of rookwise-moving Coordinators, which would capture by coordination with each other. Why not decide that the Pawns are Pincer Pawns until they are reduced to three units, Coordinators - working with each other - when they are reduced to exactly two units, and something else, maybe uncapturable and uncapturing - but probably not unimmobilizable - Rook, or Withdrawing Rook, when there is only one left? Michael Nelson wrote on 2003-04-09 UTCGood ★★★★I like the overall flavor of this game and am looking forward to your revisions. Personally, I don't care for the Coordinator. Pehaps the last pawn should instead promote to a piece its owner has lost (any time after the capture of the next-to-last pawn, counts as a move)--maybe you could extend this to the last two pawns, at the players option--this strengthens the pawn by making capturing them self-defeating beyond a certain point. Tim Stiles wrote on 2003-04-07 UTCGood ★★★★I'd say you covered the majority of the orthogonal moving pieces here, though some are left out. The question is, with all the pieces moving in a similar way, is it still good and playable? 6 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.