74 ( +1 | -1 ) itwould be nice if they would include a couple new piece designs in the set, now that many include an extra Queen. i used to have an extra Queen I made by painting it Red and who ever should happen to get two Queens could use it. But of course if one wants some different moving pieces you can always take a couple Rooks or something from an old set and paint em green and red or silver and gold if you prefer, to use with their new piece powers. Or black and white with a Dot or such for that matter. I always wanted to try a Marshall onboard. But never got to yet since I have not been doing any clubbing for a few years. I think it combines a Knight move with the moves of a Rook or Queen, I forget which. Would be interesting.
32 ( +1 | -1 ) new piecesAre you familiar with fairy chess problems ? There are dozens of different pieces, although most fall into three main groups. I'm not sure if any would make chess any better, but it would be more interesting if only one piece was used in a game (reflecting bishop would be my choice)
40 ( +1 | -1 ) When my oldest stepson comes to visit,we often play a game of Nightmare Chess. It's a product that comes with cards which create a variety of different piece powers, unique situations, etc. Not seen on the standard board. It levels the playing field since he's great at card-based games like "Magic, the Gathering" and I'm clearly stronger at chess. Not something to be taken seriously, but that's the point. ws
250 ( +1 | -1 ) Capablanca ...... once proposed expanding the board to 10x10 and adding 2 new pieces. His proposal had since been modified to a 10x8 board. The two pieces were (I think): 1] Marshal; combining power of rook and knight; 2] Cardinal (or was it chancellor?]; combining power of bishop and knight.
The mating patterns for the latter piece are interesting (the bishop standing in for the Cardinal): E.g. b Note here that the Cardinal can deliver mate on h8 without the aid of his king! I don't think it can be forced, though. w
Another mating pattern is b However, it seems likely that to force mate from a general position, the lone king would have to be driven into a corner e.g. w 1.Ke5 Ke2 2.Ke4 Kd2 3.Cb4+ Ke2 4.Cc3+ Kf2 5.Kf4 Kg2 6.Ce4+ Kf1 7.Cd3+ Kg2 8.Kg4 Kh2 9.Kf3 Kh3 10.Cf5+ Kh2 11.Kf2 Kh1 12.Cg3#
I don't know what current experience says about the relative values of the pieces, but it seems likely that the minor pieces will be somewhat devalued; and it's hard to think of the rooks as "major pieces" in the company of the upper aristocracy! If, however, the standard pieces retain their relative values, the marshal looks to be close on a par with the queen at 9 pawns (I'm thinking of the Reinfeld system), and the cardinal a little less, maybe 8 pawns.
Instead of adding pieces, one can change the nature of the game, giving the pieces different kinds of powers, or change the board.
A great game for tacticians in "Transparent Chess". In this game, all one's own pieces will allow friendly pieces to pass through them, the only caveat being that just one piece can occupy a square. Of course, enemy pieces retain their obduracy. Here's a sample: 1.Bc4 Bc5 2.Qh5 - White is threatening the c5-bishop and mate on f7. Can Black defend? 2...Bxf2+ 3.Kxf2 Qd4+ and Black recovers his piece (4.e3 Qxc4, say). You can imagine what "Alekhine's gun" would look like: the it wouldn't matter what order the heavy pieces stood on a file.
Imagine instead the board bent back on itself so that the a-file stood adjacent to the h-file. Given an open line, the WQ from d1 could travel past h5 onto a6, b7 or c8! In this rather contrived position, White has mate in 2: w 1.e3+! h5 2.Ba6#
One of my favorite Chess variants is "Looking Glass chess" or "Alice Chess". But I think I'll leave that for another posting... Cheers, ion
57 ( +1 | -1 ) Two of My Favorite Fairy PiecesGorgon: Has the movement "range" of a Q but cannot capture pieces. Instead, any piece it "attacks" is frozen and cannot be moved until the Gorgon is captured or moves away.
Chimera: Has the movement "range" of a Q but cannot capture pieces. Instead, it trades places with any piece it "captures." In one variant, "capturing" the Chimera ALSO results in trading places, which gives the interesting three-fold repetition of 1.GxQ (they exchange places) QxG (repeating the original position--this has to be possible since they have the same move) 2.GxQ QxG, drawn by repetition!
33 ( +1 | -1 ) Chess is already interestingI read somewhere an interesting article about this subject. The conclusion was that children are never happy, get bored easily and shouldn't be listened to. People with children mentality go under this category too.
I suggest playing computer games, they come in all genres and new ones are always coming out.
199 ( +1 | -1 ) theodechilde...... of course she does. I never could get that damn diagram to work! I ought to have tried it on my own board first. But it shows what interesting possibilities are with that kind of game.
"Alice Chess" involves 2 boards, the game beginning with the standard initial position on one board, the other empty. Every time a man moves, he fetches up on the other board. When it moves again, it reappears on the first board. And so on. Captures are made on the board the capturing piece is moving on, not the "destination" board. In effect, I believe, an enemy piece on a given square on one board will prevent anything moving there on the other - acts as a block, in other words. You check the king on one board, but have to cover all possible escape squares on the other to deliver mate. I used to be very fond of this version of the game!
I agree with Marin that Chess in its present form is already interesting. Even now I find fascinating new tactical and strategic ideas. But I still have this nagging feeling that the scope for human creativity or originality is becoming narrower in the present form of the game. I could, of course be unduly pessimistic in terms of the Opening. That has always been a weak part of my game, although it's also the area I have found difficult to get excited about.
But the other end of the game is also becoming closed down. I have considered the endgame to be a strong part of my game, but the advent of Tablebases has at least the potential to wipe out any advantage in skill I might have there.
But I long ago took Marin's advice. I have been playing wargames with model soldiers - Chess with a thousand pieces if you like - for the last 30-odd years. My interest and participation in Chess declined considerably when this alternative activity hove over the horizon.
On the other hand, Chess is an activity that never quite lets you go... Cheers, Ion
71 ( +1 | -1 ) IonCorrespondence chess suffers primarily from computer involvement and this would not change by changing the rules of the game. After a few generations of tweaking software programmes, they would again dominate as they do in chess.
OTB chess is always interesting, since opening traps can be easily avoided with sound development and the rest of the game needs to be actually played. Endgame technique has always been important, and tablebases have zero relevance to OTB games (unless someone is cheating of course).
I play turn-based and real-time strategy games on the computer, I find the skill sets needed somewhat similar to those needed in chess.
18 ( +1 | -1 ) What about the pawn variantthat moves in single diagonal steps, capturing on rank or file? It seems a logically missing type of motion that does not require adding superpieces.
97 ( +1 | -1 ) marinvukusic, what strategy games do you play (especially turn-based)? I still fire up Total Annihilation a good bit. So far, I think Total Annihilation still has the most possibilities for tactical ingenuity and strategical planning, but there are other games I have not played yet also. As far as turn-based games, there is always Advanced Wars for Game Boy Advance and also Massive Assualt is quite fun. The Total War series is very good and interesting, but also takes a lot of time.
I've always thought about having new pieces, but have been concerned about the effect it might have on my chess play, and to me chess isn't chess without the 64 squares and the normal pieces. You can of course make new games based on chess. One possible thing to do is to borrow some pieces from say Chinese chess. The cannon in Chinese chess moves like a rook but has to jump over a piece to capture. And the horse can be blocked if you are directly adacent to it.