Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Simon Jepps wrote on Wed, Jan 7, 2009 10:32 PM UTC:

You're right, that's still far too powerful. So I've made it just Knight and King, with a 3 square first move. That makes all issues I wanted covered and its power remains respective of the balance. Case closed.

John Smith wrote on Wed, Jan 7, 2009 10:42 PM UTC:

I agree with Mr. Muller. The Ganesha is almost certainly worth at least a Queen. Why don't you test it yourself, replacing one side's Ganeshas with Rooks?

Simon Jepps wrote on Wed, Jan 7, 2009 10:56 PM UTC:

I did John, and the Check mate he mentioned wasn't difficult. I seemed to have overlooked its abilities... it was far more powerful than I wanted... so like I said in my last post, I have edited its movement accordingly and now all is okay. All I wanted was a piece of approximately 4 points in value, and that incorporated a Knight move. My Dad and I just sat down and went through it... luckily for me, it's hard to get him interested... but all is written in stone now. Enjoy!

H. G. Muller wrote on Wed, Jan 7, 2009 10:58 PM UTC:

Well, I didn't say that it was wrong to have the K + N + lame D piece in there: even if it is worth slightly over a Queen, there is nothing against having 3 Queen-class pieces on a 10x10 board. (Capablanca has 3 Queen-class pieces on 10x8, and that is an OK variant...) Although having a piece capable of solo checkmating might not be good for a variant. (OTOH, Knightmate has that too, and does not really suffer from it.)

K+N should be 7.5-8, almost balancing a Rook + Knight in an end-game with otherwise only King and Pawns. At least it is on 8x8. On 10x10 it might lose some value, but so would the Knight, so it might still be a fair match for a Rook and a Knight.

Joe Joyce wrote on Thu, Jan 8, 2009 04:29 AM UTC:

Simon, it's relatively easy to make a basic preset. Would you be interested in making one for Sovereign Chess? Here is a very simple guide, and I can give you any assistance you need to set up a non-rules-checking preset. 

 http://chessvariants.wikidot.com/preset-primer   EDIT

Joe

Simon Jepps wrote on Mon, Jan 12, 2009 04:37 PM UTC:

Thanks Joe, I'll look into that. Meanwhile the new combined movement of Dababba and King seems to satisfy my original thesis.

H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Jan 12, 2009 11:27 PM UTC:

K+D should indeed be pretty close to a Rook, perhaps slightly below it. You could weaken it further by making it a non-jumping piece.

Mark Bates wrote on Wed, Feb 27, 2013 10:37 PM UTC:

Since the content for this game has been removed, and since I have created
a different variant with the same name, is there a way to remove the game,
so I can submit under the same name?

Thanks,

Mark Bates
Creator, Sovereign Chess
mark@sovereignchess.com

EDIT: The old game has been removed, and the associated comments moved
here.  --Ben Reiniger

8 comments displayed

⇧Earliest ⇧Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.