Kevin Pacey wrote on Mon, Nov 27, 2017 03:14 AM UTC:
Hi Aurelian
I looked at other setups for the 'Wide Chess' variant idea I'm considering, but I wanted all pawns protected, enemy bishops not on same diagonal, and more choices of squares for both waffles and lieutenants to be developed to on the third rank that didn't step on too many (ideally any) other pieces' toes in the developmental stage of the opening phase of a game. There are a good number of other 12x8 variants on this website, a search revealed, where the knights begin on the squares where I've placed them, I had comforted myself with. There are also a number of 12x8 variants with 6 short range pieces of varying types (not counting kings), and the same major pieces per side.
One possible problem I'm a bit concerned with is that with my current idea for a castling rule, it make take many moves to ever be able to castle in such a variant as mine (or some other 12x8 ones). I'm considering possibly inventing a 'leap castling' (or could be called 'fast castling') rule instead, where an unmoved king, that's not in check, leaps once in a game to any unattacked empty square between it and an unmoved rook, followed by said rook leaping to the king's initial square. It would not matter if any squares in between were occupied or under attack. This rule idea would really speed up castling on such a wide board, but one possibly significant disadvantage would be that it might reduce an opponent's attacking chances early in the game at times.
[edit: I thought of different names I might use for the elephant piece types in this variant idea: I might also call a Waffle a Working Elephant and a Lieutenant a Lead Elephant, the first letter of these elephant names and the formal piece type names staying the same for notation purposes over-the-board, at least. : P.S.: I'm reconsidering a 10x8 setup for (10x8) Hannibal Chess and Lieutenant Chess variant ideas I rejected earlier. I might just go with Hannibal Chess, as adding Lieutenant Chess might now be overdoing it - unless I wrote in any Hannibal Chess submission that players could pretend the Modern Elephant pieces were Lieutenants, if they wished to do so when playing.]
[edit: Note to self: since I've used N=3.49(or 3.5 approx.); B=3.5 and G(Guard)=4 on an 8x8 board, rather than H.G.'s findings of N=(Lone)B=3.25 and G=3.2, my estimates that follow (for my own reference) may be off without the formulae I used being necessarily off too: For 8x8: ME(Modern Elephant)=3.125; W(Waffle)=3.125; L(Lieutenant)=3.5. For 10x8: G=3.2; N=3.38; B=3.75; ME=2.695; W=2.695; L=2.97. For 12x8: G=2.667; N=3.06; B=3.75; ME=2.35; W=2.35; L=2.56.]
Hi Aurelian
I looked at other setups for the 'Wide Chess' variant idea I'm considering, but I wanted all pawns protected, enemy bishops not on same diagonal, and more choices of squares for both waffles and lieutenants to be developed to on the third rank that didn't step on too many (ideally any) other pieces' toes in the developmental stage of the opening phase of a game. There are a good number of other 12x8 variants on this website, a search revealed, where the knights begin on the squares where I've placed them, I had comforted myself with. There are also a number of 12x8 variants with 6 short range pieces of varying types (not counting kings), and the same major pieces per side.
One possible problem I'm a bit concerned with is that with my current idea for a castling rule, it make take many moves to ever be able to castle in such a variant as mine (or some other 12x8 ones). I'm considering possibly inventing a 'leap castling' (or could be called 'fast castling') rule instead, where an unmoved king, that's not in check, leaps once in a game to any unattacked empty square between it and an unmoved rook, followed by said rook leaping to the king's initial square. It would not matter if any squares in between were occupied or under attack. This rule idea would really speed up castling on such a wide board, but one possibly significant disadvantage would be that it might reduce an opponent's attacking chances early in the game at times.
[edit: I thought of different names I might use for the elephant piece types in this variant idea: I might also call a Waffle a Working Elephant and a Lieutenant a Lead Elephant, the first letter of these elephant names and the formal piece type names staying the same for notation purposes over-the-board, at least. : P.S.: I'm reconsidering a 10x8 setup for (10x8) Hannibal Chess and Lieutenant Chess variant ideas I rejected earlier. I might just go with Hannibal Chess, as adding Lieutenant Chess might now be overdoing it - unless I wrote in any Hannibal Chess submission that players could pretend the Modern Elephant pieces were Lieutenants, if they wished to do so when playing.]
[edit: Note to self: since I've used N=3.49(or 3.5 approx.); B=3.5 and G(Guard)=4 on an 8x8 board, rather than H.G.'s findings of N=(Lone)B=3.25 and G=3.2, my estimates that follow (for my own reference) may be off without the formulae I used being necessarily off too: For 8x8: ME(Modern Elephant)=3.125; W(Waffle)=3.125; L(Lieutenant)=3.5. For 10x8: G=3.2; N=3.38; B=3.75; ME=2.695; W=2.695; L=2.97. For 12x8: G=2.667; N=3.06; B=3.75; ME=2.35; W=2.35; L=2.56.]