Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
I have made a note to add Michael Schmahl's concise statement to the rules, i.e., A catapult can launch a piece occupying it to an empty square on the same rank or file. It cannnot launch diagonally. Note that the rules do have examples of legal Catapult moves and launches. On a different note, a reminder that the first checkmate problem has an error... the Catapult on E2 should have a Pawn on it.
can i assume that: 1. a bridge builder can move onto a bridge, and from there add/remove adjacent bridges? 2. a bridge builder can cross a bridge, and from there add/remove bridges to the river on the 3 squares 'behind' him?
To answer Carlos: 1. Yes, a bridge builder can move onto a bridge, and from there add/remove adjacent bridges. 2. Yes, a bridge builder can cross a bridge, and from there add/remove bridges to the river on the 3 squares'behind' him [adjacent to him]. But he can only do 'one' add or delete at a time. Also note that a bridge builder can remove a bridge that an opponent's piece is standing on. That piece effectively 'falls into the river' and is removed.
A Catapult carrying a Pawn on the far rank? Let me quote the rules: '...upon reaching the last rank, a Pawn is immediately promoted to an Archer....' Unless the remaining rules state otherwise, all specific rules are usually considered absolute. Privileges are given, not assumed.
'Broken link? ' For the Week ending Feb 22 lisiting in What's New I looked at ' Games for Game Courier. Updated lists of most popular games . . . by Author: Fergus Duniho.' I looked at the page to see what games are played the most and saw Catapults of Troy listed in the column for one of the games most often played in the last 90 days. I then clicked on the Catapults of Troy link [in that list] and got the following message: ' Not Found The requested URL /pbm/presets/catapults_of_troy.html.html was not found on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.' I then checked several other game links in the list... those links checked worked. I then checked CoT in CV's alphabetical listing. That worked.
Here is what I would do to lower the number of draws:
- Archers, in the interest of minimizing friendly fire, will not fire (capture) when on the friendly side of the river.
- Archers can leap on to or off of the Troy horse any time, as part of their normal move.
- Bridge builders can not capture nor be catpured. Any piece, friendly or enemey, can slide through the bridge builder as if the bridge builder was not there; it is illegal, however, to land in the square that the bridge builder occupies.
- A bridge builder can not destroy a bridge that is adjacent to the opponent's bridge builder.
- Bridge builders move like chess queens.
Sam Wrote: This game seems too drawish; it is too hard to launch an attack and too easy to defend. The fact that three out of eight games played on Game Courier ended in draws seems to support this contention. Response: I think the draws indicate that (a) the game is somewhat balanced. (b) no one has yet mastered the game. In fact, in 1 of those draws I was very lucky to avoid a loss. I was about to lose but I Catapulted my King onto Carlos Carlos's side of the board where my King was safe. So, that little oversight created a draw. And, if we used the Sam T. idea of archers over there not being able to shoot... guess what, that makes the game more drawish, not less. But anyway, remove my lucky draw and we have only 1 out of 4 draws. Also, I have played a large number of games against Antoine Fourrière's ZRF. And guess what? No draws for me. Not one. I win or I lose. I watched a USCF chess expert play the ZRF... he was amazed by the game and he lost over and over again. Also, it must be remembered that the CoT games at CV are played with time delays, usually of several days. In such games outright blunders (seen in over-the-board play) are much less common. As for the ideas to improve the game, I appreciate the comments but do not care to implement any changes. I think the game works well as it is.... in fact, I think it works extremely well. Note that the ZRF does have a setup option which was suggested by Antoine Fourrière. I had no problems with Antoine's idea (see the ZRF) and think he did a great job with the Catapults of Troy zillions program. If you play it at a decent level I doubt very much that you will see lots of draws.
A lot of draws often times indicates that a game is unbalanced; basically, a weak player can force a draw against a strong player. As it turns out, it's actually harder to fix a drawish game than it is to fix a game where white always win; a 'white always wins' game can usually be fixed with the pie rule; a drawn game needs to be fixed by changing the game to be less drawn (usually by making attack stronger and defense weaker) [1].
Here is some empirical evidence:
In order to make sure this is an apples-to-apples comparison: I have included two other games from the same game server that the Catapults games were played on. I have also included statistics from a real-time server, BrainKing, since this server has a large number of games, and since you mentioned that correspondence games will have more draws. I'm sure you won't do this, but if you ever change your mind and incorporate my ideas, you can still keep the same copyright on Catapults of Troy (then again, you can't copyright ideas, only artistic expression). :-p - Sam [1] Chess-like games can usually be made less drawish by adding Shogi drops to the game. |
Hey, I wasn't planning on inventing another variant for 2006 (I prefer quality over quantity), I have some ideas for a wargame variant inspired by Catapults:
|
I have notice a trend to de-value games based upon their potential for draws. Draws are not, in themselves, a negative. There is always the potential for such to be judged according to material or position. So a player might obtain a draw, but might lose according to their material or position. The draw question should be whether a player might through a set of specific moves force a draw from the start of a game, not whether any potential draw is possible. In other words, by achieving a particular position on the field the player is able to prevent the opponent from ever achieving the stated capture goal of the game. And as stated, a draw-ish game is not, by its nature, 'broken', it can still be evaluated by material or position if the players desire. Though if it is possible to force a draw each and every game, the stated capture goal might be considered inconsequential or at the least merely an influence during the game. I apologize to Gary for my rant.
Adrian - You state: 'In the mate problem, after Ram to h1, can't the King move onto the catapult at e2?' Answer: Yes; And the fact that you noticed the escape is very good. It was also pointed out by Ed (last name not known) in 2003. In December of 2003 I commented that White's C2 Catapult should really be a 'Catapult/Pawn' combo piece. With the piece correction White does not have that unintended escape. Unlike newer games, I cannot access the rules page to fix it. Best regards, Gary
Few clarifications from Gary: 1) Troy Horse can leave an Archer on a bridge square. 2) Ram can shoot from Catapult. After this Ram must be removed from the board, Catapult must remain on the board. Very interesting game of Catapults: http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game=Catapults+of+Troy&log=makov333-nickwolffrated-2009-245-443
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.