Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Feb 18, 2020 04:31 PM UTC:
My thoughts -
Zebra: The Camel is the more common complement to the Knight. I think a Zebra is OK on a 10x10 board but would be less mobile than the Knight because more moves would be off-board (although a Camel is color-bound so also weaker than a Knight, but I think this is OK because a Bishop is a colorbound piece that could be considered the complement of the Rook.) Also, if you keep the Zebra, I think you should keep the name as-is.
No Draws: I'm not sure how advisible this is. The point of Stalemate is to give the player who is behind something to play for. For repetition and 100-move rule, at a minimum, the written description needs to be clarified. It currently says the "last player to move" wins, but your comment says "last to capture". And for 100-move, do you mean "last to capture or push a pawn"? That would make more sense. And do you mean 100 half-moves, like the Chess 50-move rule? Or do you really mean 100 full moves? I think that would be too much and I don't see any reason to increase it at all. Personally, I'd scrap all of this and leave all the victory/draw conditions as in orthodox Chess, but that is just personal opinion.
My thoughts -
Zebra: The Camel is the more common complement to the Knight. I think a Zebra is OK on a 10x10 board but would be less mobile than the Knight because more moves would be off-board (although a Camel is color-bound so also weaker than a Knight, but I think this is OK because a Bishop is a colorbound piece that could be considered the complement of the Rook.) Also, if you keep the Zebra, I think you should keep the name as-is.
No Draws: I'm not sure how advisible this is. The point of Stalemate is to give the player who is behind something to play for. For repetition and 100-move rule, at a minimum, the written description needs to be clarified. It currently says the "last player to move" wins, but your comment says "last to capture". And for 100-move, do you mean "last to capture or push a pawn"? That would make more sense. And do you mean 100 half-moves, like the Chess 50-move rule? Or do you really mean 100 full moves? I think that would be too much and I don't see any reason to increase it at all. Personally, I'd scrap all of this and leave all the victory/draw conditions as in orthodox Chess, but that is just personal opinion.