Rated Comments

Below is a link to a site apparently written by the inventor of Grand Chess (and other variants); in it's coverage of that variant, it mentions that the inventor strove for 'completeness' (by adding the Archbishop and Chancellor piece types that he felt were missing from FIDE chess) - similar to the inventor of Amazon Grand Chess, I kind of feel logical completeness might mean including an amazon piece for each side (possibly the inventor of Grand Chess rejected this simply due to having an odd number of pieces in each army as a result). Note in my 10x10 variant Sac Chess, which has had a lot of testing, having 2 amazons per side (though on a crowded board initially) doesn't seem to hurt the quality of the play in games much at all.

Anyway, for a variant idea I'm still considering, I came up with an alternative setup to that of Amazon Grand Chess (I thought reverse symmetry for the setup can be used, to make the odd number of pieces per side seem less asymmetrical, IMO). On a seperate website from the one below I saw some posters wishing that Grand Chess used normal promotion rules, as in chess (so that the board's edge is made use of for one thing), and also that it allowed a king to leap up to 3 squares once per game, to make up for the absence of castling, so I'm considering these as possible refinements, too. I'll also mention that one thing I don't quite like about the Amazon Grand Chess setup is that the amazon and queen of each side are doubled on a file (albeit behind a pawn) before play even begins... Now, here's the link I mentioned:

http://www.mindsports.nl/index.php/how-i-invented-games-and-why-not/chess-variants-are-easy

[edit: Here's a link to a discussion I alluded to, about how Grand Chess might be improved:]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AGrand_chess

[edit2: Here's a diagram of a CV idea of mine that might be called Grandiose Chess, which I'll study at leisure (pawns would promote on last rank to any piece type in the setup, except for a king, and an unmoved king that's not in check can leap up to three squares away to an unoccupied square on the first or second rank that's not under attack, regardless of any pieces or enemy attacks that may be in between):][edit3: I'm not liking this so much just now - perhaps it's a worse version of Grand Chess, or even of my own Sac Chess:]

I see that a new study of historical sources on Tori Shogi has been published: https://www.amazon.co.jp/禽将棋についての研究-禽将棋の背景と系統的位置づけ-MyISBN-デザインエッグ社-松本尚也/dp/4815014205/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_ja_JP=カタカナ&keywords=禽将棋&qid=1575339500&sr=8-1

I wonder if any Japanese have read the book and can comment on what new discoveries this book reveals.

It seems awful to have the Queen (a non-jumping piece) starting trapped in the corner; you now cannot develop it without breaking the Pawn shield, so j-side castling becomes very unattractive. Two-step castling sucks anyway, on 10-wide boards.

Hi all,

I'd like to share with you a project. Creating a classification of Chess Variants using "pragmatic methodology" to compare them.

Please share with me your thoughts here, or at the following link: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/a-system-to-classify-chess-variants

Very handy tool! I was able to check the end games of most of my variants. 

I do have a question on King vs Royal Wazir + knight. How do I check the winning percentage for the King? It gives me an error when I attempt 3men K.WN, whereas WN.K is a sure 0% win.

Alternative pieces that I have questions with:

how could I define a unit that cannot capture at all?

how could I drfine a unit that cannot move at all?

thanks

Prussia

I've been racking my brain lately trying to come up with a good 12x8 variant (or maybe even larger) that besides having the FIDE army per side includes the Archbishop and Chancellor piece types (as Sosarian Chess does, here), with very few other piece types added as well. Eric Greenwood wrote on his ArchCourier Chess rules page that he couldn't make these criteria work together for him (on 12x8), to his satisfaction.

I've noticed that there are 3(!) presets for Sosarian Chess, each with slightly different setups. The one I prefer (as apparently does Greg, based on a comment in a game of his with Jeremy Good) is the setup with White: Q on a1, A on f1 and C on l1, with Black placed similarly; this particular preset is called 'SosarianChess' (no space between the two words).

There's also a setup that was unintended to be used (again based on a comment by Greg in said game with Jeremy Good), a preset that has 2 A's and a C (no Q) per side; this particular preset is called 'Sosarian'.

Finally, there is a preset with White: A on a1, Q on f1 and C on l1, with Black placed similarly; this particular preset is called 'Standard'.

The reason I prefer the same setup as Greg (to the 'standard' one) is, in addition to his one, in a comment to Jeremy (that the Q helps guard an edge pawn again, in the setup), I like that an A on f1 can discourage the Black C (on l8) from developing to k6, since White can push the pawn in front of his king, as soon as move one, if he wishes to. Thus the setup helps keep the Chancellors from always developing to the k-file by a knight leap, followed by an unfortunate exchange of these pieces on said file, which could be a waste of their presence in the setup.

So, aside from agreeing that the SosarianChess preset has the best setup, and should be preferred, I found the choice of Lions as the added piece type (compared to 10x8 Capablanca Chess, etc) interesting. I'd quickly estimate the piece type to be worth about 4.75 on 12x8. Its ability to leap 2 squares orthogonally (besides 3) comes in handy, as it can go to the third rank and still be protected by a pawn. Since it also moves like a ferz, it usefully guards pawns in the setup.

One thing I've been undecided on is whether to have some sort of fast castling rules (as in my earlier 12x8 Wide Chess) for any board that's wide - no one has recently commented on whether they like such a rule, but for my 12x8 variants so far people seem to have voted with their feet (unless some other features were unattractive, alternatively). Anyway, Sosarian Chess deals with this issue by having the rooks each one file closer to the centre, and then retaining Capablanca Chess style castling rules (I observed this from a comment by Greg to Jeremy, when I was seeking confirmation). Based on Greg's (longer) game with Jeremy, the latter was on the verge of actually castling at one point, and so it seems Greg's way of handling the castling issue may be fully feasible.

No one has played this variant in a long time, maybe partly because of confusion about what the setup position should be (a tidying up of the presets at some point would clear that up, unless there was meant to be a choice offered if players preferred). It looks like it could be a very fun game, albeit one with a lot of powerful pieces and kings that may feel insecure often at the start. That's in spite of the queen(s) possibly being a little buried for a while at the start of a given game, with my favourite setup being used.

[edit: Here's a link that currently includes the 3 presets I mentioned above for this variant (Sosarian Chess):]

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/settings.php?author=mageofmaple

[edit: Here's a link that gives all finished games of Sosarian Chess (regardless of preset used in a given game):]

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/logs.php?game=Sosarian+Chess&age=0&stat=finished

A very interesting game.  And you have the interactive diagram using our signature Alfaerie pieces and colors!  I love it :)

Hi, it's always good to hear criticism. And i think you've got it right.

Personally i give you the pieces i much like when playing Musketeer Chess: Hawk, Unicorn +++ and my favorite is the Archbishop combining Bishop and Knight abilities. I much like sacrificing my Queen for an Archbishop !!

Musketeer Chess idea was to get rid of the big amount of draws and also opening learning (long theoretical lines). The idea is also to give black a more important role by deciding the final combination of pieces, adapting his strategy to white's choice which will lower for sure the importance of white's advantage as the side who begins the game; But this needs for sure a precise play.

You pointed out the fact that the Board is overcrowded. Of course it becomes a problem if you choose to gate you r pieces whithout a prior clear strategy and this will hamper you from exploiting the huge potential of the new pieces.

The newly added pieces are strong and they bring so much excitment and tactics from the first move ! So the slightest lack of attention can be punished (more spectacular wins) but also if you lower your attention even with a huge material advantage on the board, your opponent can surprise you and mate you using the newest pieces whom some can mate alone.

Yes, Musketeer Chess is not a perfect game, but Classic Chess became mostly a game of "knowledge" and opening learning and is for sure less attractive for average kids and players that want to improve their level but are frustrated by this learning.

Elite tournaments are less spectacular and games most usually finish with draws.

I think it's a fusion between Wildbeast and Xhess not XChess. XChess is a variation with an hourglass.

Chris

I am currently playing a game of Odin's Rune Chess, and I really like it, as much the rules and gameplay, as the runic theme. The Forest Ox is a terrific piece, maybe too powerful... I like the rather strong Pawns. I generally appreciate modern variants that use non-conventional Pawns, it effectively renews the dynamics of a chess game. And their initial colorboundness isn't a default at all, for me.

I was wondering if Pawn promotion could be integrated in this game - even if it is not necessary since Pawns can go back and the need for new material is less crucial, since the vulnerabiliy of the Kings without moving possibilities makes situations of insufficent material less likely. Promotion possibilities should be limited, since Pawns can reach the last rank in only four moves; for example, they could only promote to previously captured pieces of his own colour; or there could be limitations to the maximum number of pieces of each type present on the board (4 Valkyries, and 4 Forest Oxen, for example - which is already a lot). One can also think of the opportunity to permit the promotion to King (here too, the maximum number must be limited or promotion be only to previously captured Kings). But the game plays already well, I don't think it needs a promotion rule. I was just wondering how promotion could affect the gameplay, and if it could be interessant as a variant.

Edit: my comment about the possibility of promotion wasn't very pertinent. Promotion doesn't make much sense in this game.

Just played this very interesting game. A single Knight won the game when White was at a larrge disadvantage being down a bishop and a rook. 

(note b2=P means b2 is flipped and a Pawn is revealed. Pawns are desginated P and there is no short-form notation)

1. c2=P   c7=C
2. Pe2-e3   ....

Otherwise Cc7xc1 #

2. ...       Cc7xc1 (xB)
3. Ke1-e2 Cc1xa1 (xP)
4. g2=N    b7=B
5. Ng2-f4  Bb7xh1 (xR)
6. Nf4-e6

After a careless capture at h1, which yielded a rook advantage (rook is the strongest unit on board at the start), Black resigns at this point, since Nxg7 or Nc7 are both checkmates and no possible move could defend both squares. The King could not move as its only revealed piece, the e7 pawn, is blocked by the white Knight. Other unrevealed p

Very good stuff. I have seen one of these before in person while in Japan and was amazed. Beautiful and fun to play variant. I really like the Taikyoku shogi. I wonder if that george guy makes those too, or even makes these still. 

The page for this game was very old and the content wasn't really appropriate as a formal description of this historic game, so I have completely rewritten it.  The original version can still be found here.

Nice.  Thank you for making a page for this awesome utility!  I have moved the comments about this from the CwDA page here.

Please add random piece link in this website.

This game makes for a fine blend of two already interesting games.

At first when playing I felt like I was starting out missing an important pawn, but then I remembered that in chess, the Exchange Variation of the French Defence can produce plenty of interesting and decisive games, even between strong players.

Interesting board shape. I'm currently not absolutely sure that bishops are quite as strong as rooks, on average.

Hello Anthony

Thank you for replying after all these years that the post has been up.  I saw your post, I do care, and I am replying here.  I am the Michael Ireland who wrote the original post.  I have been trying to reply through my account but it has gone dormant and I haven't been able to successfully logon, so am replying anonymously.  I have not found my answers yet but I am pretty sure this is NOT byzantine chess.

I will do my best to answer your questions.

It has been a long time since I played the game but this is how I think it worked. The board is made up of "rings" and "crosses" (spaces).  There is a centre star (space) in the middle which acts like a cross in all regards but a piece cannot start there. Each player starts with all of their pieces off the board.  There is a king, 2 rooks (flat tops), 2 bishops (spikes) and 4 pawns per side. On their first turn (white goes first) each player places their king anywhere on the board on any "cross" but not on the centre star (I believe that no piece could start on the centre star because it gives too much of an advantage to start there - but I am not 100% certain of the rule).  Then in the second and subsequent turns, each player can either move an existing piece or bring another piece onto the board as per turn 1.  The goal of the game is to checkmate your opponent's king as in regular chess.  Different pieces move differently.  A pawn or the king can move from one cross to another cross in any direction.  A rook moves up to 3 crosses up or down, or one cross to the side.  A bishop moves up to 3 crosses around one of the rings, or one cross up or down.  Any piece once on the board can enter the star in the middle.  A rook can move through it.  A player can take an opponent's piece by moving a piece into their opponent's piece's cross.  Once a piece is removed from the board it is gone.  I don't belive there is a special move in this game that makes a pawn become another piece like a rook or bishop.

That is it, essentially, but again, I am putting this together from a hazy recollection having not played for 40 years or so.

I hope this answers your questions but I want to say that your query made me go through the process of writing things down here and in a way, helped me work back to an approximation of how the game worked (with a few pieces of the puzzle still needed).  I think I could try playing it again and seeing how things worked.

I have not given up hoping someone will see this and recognize the game and the rules, but talking about it is always good.  So thank you again for replying!

Michael Ireland

PS: I did come up with one tantalizing lead about the manufacturer Arne Basse and this particular chess variant set.  Online I found a photo of a regular chess set that clearly was made by the same manufacturer because the board had the same leather surface (but with a regular chess grid) and the carved wooden pieces were the same except there were queens and knights. No other information was attached to the photo sadly but it was an interesting find.

Thanks for the response, that is kind of what I thought but wasn't sure. 
Greg

I just began play-testing and I like it a lot.  My thoughts so far:

There is a tiny bit of ambiguity as to whether the “same file rule” from Shogi is meant to apply to pawn drops (presumably it is not). I believe it can be played either way. I haven't tested it yet, but to try, the following condition could apply:

A pawn may not be dropped onto the same vertical diagonal of any other non-promoted pawn belonging to the same player.

Or an even stricter alternative:

A pawn may not be dropped onto the same rank or file of any other non-promoted pawn belonging to the same player.

In the illustrations for piece movement, notice how the rook travels through one edge and then through the opposite edge of each square in its path (even if the 'square' curves a right angle), while the bishop travels through one corner and then through the opposite corner of each square in its path, but seems to be prohibited from doing so on the curved squares (from the black bishop's position in the diagram). If this prohibition were lifted, that same black bishop's range of movement would include traveling from one curved edge square to the next and then back across the board horizontally, forming a loop back to it's original position.

Also, although it is not explicitly mentioned in the original rules, I think it's probably a good idea to declare that a rook or  a queen (or a bishop) may not land on the square from which they originated on that turn, even if a path to it exists unobstructed.

Finally, my thoughts about the pawn. The language and illustration of the original rules regarding pawn movement suggests that pawns capturing moves and non-capturing moves are executed in the same way (unlike conventional chess). Optionally, one could alter the rules for pawn movement so that it moves (but does not capture) exactly one square in either of the orthogonal directions that is away from its own side of the playing board or it can capture to the cell diagonally ahead of it (if there is an enemy piece occupying that square).

I just made my copy of the board yesterday, and have only had the opportunity to play-test the original rules.  But yeah, it was a lot of fun!  Thanks!

This is a very nice-playing modest variant. I've greatly enjoyed my games of it. I can absolutely recommend this game as an excellent variant tournament choice. It gets a lot of mileage out of a pair of fairly simple changes. The initial set-up is excellent; it gives good play. The weak piece is a very nice choice, and provides a nice companion/foil for the bishop and knight.

One of the very best variant on the site!

Truly beautiful concept, and it appears to work.  (I have not had an opportunity to try it myself, yet.)

Reading through the comments, much of the complaints seem to focus on the power of the knightrider's ability to reach the back row and promote.  I wonder if anyone has considered that the knightrider move and the promotion rules may not work together perfectly?  Changing them would result in a different game, but possibly a better one.  Just a thought.

Excellent time travel twist on chess!  Beautiful!

Another clean design by Gary Gifford.  Nothing here but the pawns, king, and fully-loaded trojan horse.  Set-up-your-pieces opening, essentially.  Interesting, but personally I prefer a bigger variety of pieces.

I can still admire the clean design!

This page contains the rules for this game:

Sirlin's Chess2-the Sequel

I agree that name reeks of hubris.  However, that page has all the discussion about the game on it.  I would be great if this page were linked to it in the main body of text.