DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
The Chess Variant Forum
HTML https://chessvariantforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Variant/Project Announcement, Description and Purch...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 747--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: HGMuller Date: April 2, 2018, 3:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
On further thought, it coud be better to allow an Air Lift to
only fly over friendly pieces. Or assign ranking to pieces in a
way similar to Tenjiku Shogi, where it cannot fly over pieces of
a certain class (namely those with surface-to-air capability).
Which should then be reasonably common to protect a player's
camp from infiltration by flying enemy pieces.
Of course there could also be flying pieces that don't carry
others, but capture by themselves. There could even be several
classes of flying pieces (like in Tenjiku), normal planes,
stealth planes, ICBMs, progressively more difficult to stop
(i.e. the number of pieces they cannot fly over decreasing).
A Nuke could be a piece that moves as a Queen and optionally
clears an entire 5x5 area after its move, which can only be
blocked by a 'Missile Defense'. (Of which a player should have
enough to keep his King safe.) Perhaps it should not even be
allowed to pass over a 5x5 area centered on a Missile Defense.
Cruise Missiles could teleport with a finite range (say in a
10x10 area), and just capture on their target square
(self-destructing in the process), or (the nuclear-tipped
variety) a 3x3 area around it.
There exists a variant called 'Regiment Chess' where it is
always allowed to move any number of pieces of the same type
along the same vector. Perhaps this would also be an idea here.
It would of course only be useful for piece types of which you
have many.
I am not sure we would want only few piece types. In Taikyoku
Shogi most types do occur at most twice. Although it might be a
good idea to have some piece types that do occur in many copies
(various types of Infantry), next to Pawns. On a 40-wide board
you could have 40 Pawns, and 4 different kinds of Infantry, of
which you each have 10. Scirocco is one of my favorite chess
variants, b.t.w. Typhoon is a bit 'over the top' for my taste.
#Post#: 750--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 2, 2018, 8:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Martin0 link=topic=103.msg746#msg746
date=1522659179]
How many pieces do you intend to use? When I talked about the
infantry piece I was thinking of maybe having about 250 infantry
pieces in a 50 x 5 area (if we're using a 50 x 50 board). Maybe
a bit less or more depending on the other pieces and if you want
to have a few holes in the infantry piece area (empty squares)
or if you want the infantry to cover a larger area (such as 500
infantry pieces in 50 x 10 area).
Regardless, I would like to know how many pieces you want to use
and how many types of different pieces. If it is around 800
pieces for each side, then I don't really think it is a good
idea to have a lot of different types of pieces that you have
only 1, 2 or 4 of each. We don't want over 100 types of pieces
with different rulesets, that's for sure (who would even
remember those rules?).
Also, I'm not really sure if I really understand the last post.
What is your definition of how big a squad is? I had it as a 5x5
area you can choose wherever you want, but is your squad related
to where the infantryman is located instead? I am not at all
worried about squads being too powerful, but rather the
opposite. Too weak compared to moving the most powerful pieces.
I would also prefer if squads was only related to how pieces
move, not how other pieces captures pieces that are a member of
a squad and no piece that interacts with enemy squads. Captures
that cover an area is already some sort of counter since army
movement encourages your pieces to be close to each other.
[/quote]
I'm thinking the type to number of piece ratio of Taikyoku shogi
would be better.
#Post#: 751--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 2, 2018, 1:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HGMuller link=topic=103.msg747#msg747
date=1522659303]
On further thought, it coud be better to allow an Air Lift to
only fly over friendly pieces. Or assign ranking to pieces in a
way similar to Tenjiku Shogi, where it cannot fly over pieces of
a certain class (namely those with surface-to-air capability).
Which should then be reasonably common to protect a player's
camp from infiltration by flying enemy pieces.
Of course there could also be flying pieces that don't carry
others, but capture by themselves. There could even be several
classes of flying pieces (like in Tenjiku), normal planes,
stealth planes, ICBMs, progressively more difficult to stop
(i.e. the number of pieces they cannot fly over decreasing).
A Nuke could be a piece that moves as a Queen and optionally
clears an entire 5x5 area after its move, which can only be
blocked by a 'Missile Defense'. (Of which a player should have
enough to keep his King safe.) Perhaps it should not even be
allowed to pass over a 5x5 area centered on a Missile Defense.
Cruise Missiles could teleport with a finite range (say in a
10x10 area), and just capture on their target square
(self-destructing in the process), or (the nuclear-tipped
variety) a 3x3 area around it.
There exists a variant called 'Regiment Chess' where it is
always allowed to move any number of pieces of the same type
along the same vector. Perhaps this would also be an idea here.
It would of course only be useful for piece types of which you
have many.
I am not sure we would want only few piece types. In Taikyoku
Shogi most types do occur at most twice. Although it might be a
good idea to have some piece types that do occur in many copies
(various types of Infantry), next to Pawns. On a 40-wide board
you could have 40 Pawns, and 4 different kinds of Infantry, of
which you each have 10. Scirocco is one of my favorite chess
variants, b.t.w. Typhoon is a bit 'over the top' for my taste.
[/quote]
Hm, good suggestions. I have a feeling this might turn into a
more extreme Scirocco (which isn't a bad thing).
#Post#: 753--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: Martin0 Date: April 2, 2018, 3:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg750#msg750
date=1522674346]
[quote author=Martin0 link=topic=103.msg746#msg746
date=1522659179]
How many pieces do you intend to use? When I talked about the
infantry piece I was thinking of maybe having about 250 infantry
pieces in a 50 x 5 area (if we're using a 50 x 50 board). Maybe
a bit less or more depending on the other pieces and if you want
to have a few holes in the infantry piece area (empty squares)
or if you want the infantry to cover a larger area (such as 500
infantry pieces in 50 x 10 area).
Regardless, I would like to know how many pieces you want to use
and how many types of different pieces. If it is around 800
pieces for each side, then I don't really think it is a good
idea to have a lot of different types of pieces that you have
only 1, 2 or 4 of each. We don't want over 100 types of pieces
with different rulesets, that's for sure (who would even
remember those rules?).
Also, I'm not really sure if I really understand the last post.
What is your definition of how big a squad is? I had it as a 5x5
area you can choose wherever you want, but is your squad related
to where the infantryman is located instead? I am not at all
worried about squads being too powerful, but rather the
opposite. Too weak compared to moving the most powerful pieces.
I would also prefer if squads was only related to how pieces
move, not how other pieces captures pieces that are a member of
a squad and no piece that interacts with enemy squads. Captures
that cover an area is already some sort of counter since army
movement encourages your pieces to be close to each other.
[/quote]
I'm thinking the type to number of piece ratio of Taikyoku shogi
would be better.
[/quote]
So Taikyoku shogi is played on an 36 x 36 board with 402 pieces
of 209 types.
If we convert that to 50x50 board we get 775 pieces of 403
types.
I like your enthusiasm, but I'm very pessimistic of having that
many piece types.
#Post#: 754--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 2, 2018, 4:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Martin0 link=topic=103.msg753#msg753
date=1522702169]
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg750#msg750
date=1522674346]
[quote author=Martin0 link=topic=103.msg746#msg746
date=1522659179]
How many pieces do you intend to use? When I talked about the
infantry piece I was thinking of maybe having about 250 infantry
pieces in a 50 x 5 area (if we're using a 50 x 50 board). Maybe
a bit less or more depending on the other pieces and if you want
to have a few holes in the infantry piece area (empty squares)
or if you want the infantry to cover a larger area (such as 500
infantry pieces in 50 x 10 area).
Regardless, I would like to know how many pieces you want to use
and how many types of different pieces. If it is around 800
pieces for each side, then I don't really think it is a good
idea to have a lot of different types of pieces that you have
only 1, 2 or 4 of each. We don't want over 100 types of pieces
with different rulesets, that's for sure (who would even
remember those rules?).
Also, I'm not really sure if I really understand the last post.
What is your definition of how big a squad is? I had it as a 5x5
area you can choose wherever you want, but is your squad related
to where the infantryman is located instead? I am not at all
worried about squads being too powerful, but rather the
opposite. Too weak compared to moving the most powerful pieces.
I would also prefer if squads was only related to how pieces
move, not how other pieces captures pieces that are a member of
a squad and no piece that interacts with enemy squads. Captures
that cover an area is already some sort of counter since army
movement encourages your pieces to be close to each other.
[/quote]
I'm thinking the type to number of piece ratio of Taikyoku shogi
would be better.
[/quote]
So Taikyoku shogi is played on an 36 x 36 board with 402 pieces
of 209 types.
If we convert that to 50x50 board we get 775 pieces of 403
types.
I like your enthusiasm, but I'm very pessimistic of having that
many piece types.
[/quote]
There's the problem I'm facing right now. I need a lot of
pieces. I have a feeling I'll be just getting a lot of pieces
from other variants.
#Post#: 757--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 3, 2018, 9:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Martin0 link=topic=103.msg746#msg746
date=1522659179]
How many pieces do you intend to use? When I talked about the
infantry piece I was thinking of maybe having about 250 infantry
pieces in a 50 x 5 area (if we're using a 50 x 50 board). Maybe
a bit less or more depending on the other pieces and if you want
to have a few holes in the infantry piece area (empty squares)
or if you want the infantry to cover a larger area (such as 500
infantry pieces in 50 x 10 area).
Regardless, I would like to know how many pieces you want to use
and how many types of different pieces. If it is around 800
pieces for each side, then I don't really think it is a good
idea to have a lot of different types of pieces that you have
only 1, 2 or 4 of each. We don't want over 100 types of pieces
with different rulesets, that's for sure (who would even
remember those rules?).
Also, I'm not really sure if I really understand the last post.
What is your definition of how big a squad is? I had it as a 5x5
area you can choose wherever you want, but is your squad related
to where the infantryman is located instead? I am not at all
worried about squads being too powerful, but rather the
opposite. Too weak compared to moving the most powerful pieces.
I would also prefer if squads was only related to how pieces
move, not how other pieces captures pieces that are a member of
a squad and no piece that interacts with enemy squads. Captures
that cover an area is already some sort of counter since army
movement encourages your pieces to be close to each other.
[/quote]
Squads are centered around an Infantryman.
#Post#: 833--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: joejoyce Date: April 20, 2018, 9:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg733#msg733
date=1522591966]
I have an idea, why don't we make it so that when a piece in the
opponent's side of the board gets captured, one type of your
pieces gets promoted. This should allow for more powerful pieces
to come through.[/quote]
Graeme Neatham and I tried this idea of battlefield promotions -
promoting a piece when it captures - but found it destroyed the
game we were playtesting. In chess, most pieces are guarded, and
when one player captures, the other generally recaptures. This
means that whoever captures first gives the opponent a promoted
piece, effectively. We stopped being the first to capture...
#Post#: 836--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 21, 2018, 11:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=joejoyce link=topic=103.msg833#msg833
date=1524235387]
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg733#msg733
date=1522591966]
I have an idea, why don't we make it so that when a piece in the
opponent's side of the board gets captured, one type of your
pieces gets promoted. This should allow for more powerful pieces
to come through.[/quote]
Graeme Neatham and I tried this idea of battlefield promotions -
promoting a piece when it captures - but found it destroyed the
game we were playtesting. In chess, most pieces are guarded, and
when one player captures, the other generally recaptures. This
means that whoever captures first gives the opponent a promoted
piece, effectively. We stopped being the first to capture...
[/quote]
Good point. Although we can make this rule: When a piece
promotes, it may also move in the same turn. Or: When a piece
promotes, it is unable to be captured in the next turn.
#Post#: 845--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: joejoyce Date: April 22, 2018, 8:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg836#msg836
date=1524326469]
[quote author=joejoyce link=topic=103.msg833#msg833
date=1524235387]
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg733#msg733
date=1522591966]
I have an idea, why don't we make it so that when a piece in the
opponent's side of the board gets captured, one type of your
pieces gets promoted. This should allow for more powerful pieces
to come through.[/quote]
Graeme Neatham and I tried this idea of battlefield promotions -
promoting a piece when it captures - but found it destroyed the
game we were playtesting. In chess, most pieces are guarded, and
when one player captures, the other generally recaptures. This
means that whoever captures first gives the opponent a promoted
piece, effectively. We stopped being the first to capture...
[/quote]
Good point. Although we can make this rule: When a piece
promotes, it may also move in the same turn. Or: When a piece
promotes, it is unable to be captured in the next turn.[/quote]
Ow! Both of those rules have what I think you would consider
unintended consequences. In the first case, a single piece could
capture, then move and capture again, and again... a knight's
tour could end the game in one turn of 800 or so consecutive
moves. The second case is just slower. A piece, as long as it
keeps capturing, is invulnerable. What kind of piece density are
you looking at, and why? :) You might want to re-think what
pieces are in a giant game like a 50x50.
#Post#: 851--------------------------------------------------
Re: A Chess variant to surpass Taikyoku
By: ubersketch Date: April 23, 2018, 7:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=joejoyce link=topic=103.msg845#msg845
date=1524446305]
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg836#msg836
date=1524326469]
[quote author=joejoyce link=topic=103.msg833#msg833
date=1524235387]
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=103.msg733#msg733
date=1522591966]
I have an idea, why don't we make it so that when a piece in the
opponent's side of the board gets captured, one type of your
pieces gets promoted. This should allow for more powerful pieces
to come through.[/quote]
Graeme Neatham and I tried this idea of battlefield promotions -
promoting a piece when it captures - but found it destroyed the
game we were playtesting. In chess, most pieces are guarded, and
when one player captures, the other generally recaptures. This
means that whoever captures first gives the opponent a promoted
piece, effectively. We stopped being the first to capture...
[/quote]
Good point. Although we can make this rule: When a piece
promotes, it may also move in the same turn. Or: When a piece
promotes, it is unable to be captured in the next turn.[/quote]
Ow! Both of those rules have what I think you would consider
unintended consequences. In the first case, a single piece could
capture, then move and capture again, and again... a knight's
tour could end the game in one turn of 800 or so consecutive
moves. The second case is just slower. A piece, as long as it
keeps capturing, is invulnerable. What kind of piece density are
you looking at, and why? :) You might want to re-think what
pieces are in a giant game like a 50x50.
[/quote]
When a piece promotes.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page