[ 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 Three Kinds of Billiards Chess. Pieces bounce off the edges of the board. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]George Duke wrote on 2008-01-24 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Multi-path routing is important in order to reach squares that may be blocked along one or more pathways. Under related Billiards Progressive we pose the puzzle of distribution of triple paths. In standard Billiards(8x8), the following hold. Bishops and Queens have some (potential) three-path squares, reachable three different ways, so long as they are not on an edge square(the answer). Examples: (1) Bishop at b2 can reach g7 by way of b2-a3-b4-c5-d6-e7-f8-g7 bouncing twice, or else b2-c1-d2-e3-f4-g5-h6-g7 bouncing twice, or else b2-c3-d4-e5-f6-g7 not bouncing. Queen likewise. (2) Queen has more such 3-way squares than Bishop, because of Queen's Rook movement. However Queen still cannot do so from an edge square of square boards like 8x8 and 10x10. Queen has three here: Queen b2-c2-d2, and b2-a3-b4-c5-d6-e7-f8-g7-h6-g5-f4-e3-d2 bouncing three times, and b2-c1-d2 bouncing once. Bishop there has only the second and third of those. In 'Multipath Chess Pieces' year 2004 we put forth the proposition that multi-pathing is the norm. It is mere custom that dictates, for example, that standard Rook from c3 to c7 goes by way of c3-c4-c5-c6-c7 only. Our conclusion reads ''Beyond chronology, any Rule of movement writ large, having real-world counterparts allegorically, describes something multiform and multipath, whereof reduction to mere 'Leaper' or 'Rider' is actually the special case.'' George Duke wrote on 2008-01-23 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Editor Quintanilla goodnaturedly rejected the idea of systematic, organized review of Chess Variant Page material I proposed January 2007 under pseudonym 'Charles Fort'. Starting June 2007 I have been doing it anyway, as half of my Comments, figuring that some relative newcomers, navigating the material and still being subjected to subpar Comments, lengthy and devoid of much content, by one poor prolificist ( who resents our honest evaluations after repeatedly requesting them), may appreciate it. The date here for 'Three Billiards...', by computer programming catch-up of files, '15.January.1996', inclusively came to cover several dozen CVPage articles from late 1995 too. Only few CVPage write-ups appear still to have '1995', somehow one or two '1994' also, when I am not sure CVPage was online as yet. Here Betza configures the Knight for Billiards, just referred to under Billiards Progressive, in one of the very first 40 or 60 CVPage write-ups. Betza suggests Cylindrical power equates with Billiards power, but the former would be stronger empowerment because of applying to all the pieces of a side. Charles Gilman wrote on 2003-06-14 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Your own Excellent still raised the overall rating, but on reflection(!) you deserve it anyway. I am still spotting games in which the feature would be a useful addition. While you are right that a biliards feature does little for the Rook, it does more for Rook variants such as Xiang Qi's Cannon. In nearly all cases it allows a Cannon to jump an enemy piece that is the only piece between the Cannon and the edge, bounce off the edge, and capture the piece on the way back! The exception is where the enemy piece is at the END of the rank or file in the 'HALB' option, in which case the Cannon can jump that piece to capture another enemy piece on or towards the OTHER end of the rank or file! gnohmon wrote on 2003-04-22 UTCExcellent ★★★★★'Your middle option, which removes colourbinding,' The 'excellent' rating is for your observation not for my old page. An interesting game would be 'Gilman's Observation Chess', combining the rules os Billiards:00 with the rules of Colorboundmost Chess, and adding the rule that no piece may bounce more than once per game. Charles Gilman wrote on 2003-04-21 UTCGood ★★★★Your middle option, which removes colourbinding, has interesting implications for Ferzes, Camels, Dabbabas, and Alfils/Elephants. Have you considered applying it to Chaturanga, Xiang Qi, and Timur/Tamerlane Chess? 5 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ EarlierPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.