Enter Your Reply

Immediately after playtesting, I realized that I really had at least two variant ideas (move-capture ideas)...but didn't figure out *a* way (not necessarily the most precise way but a real way) of characterizing them until yesterday.

Delayed Attack Chess - If you move the same piece twice in a row, you can not capture on the second move.

Take the ordinary FIDE position.

1. P e2-e4 p d2-d5

2. Obviously white's e4 pawn can not capture black's d5 pawn because that would violate the above rule (moving the same piece twice in a row with capture on the second move).

2. N g1-f3 Now black can not capture the e4 pawn because that would violate the same rule of course, of not being able to capture with the second move if you move the same piece twice.

2....p e7-e6

3. P e4xd5 Now white can capture finally the pawn but black can not yet capture back, of course!

3....p c7-c6

4. P c2-c4 p e6xd5

5. N b1-c3 N g8-f6

6. P d2-d4 (and so forth).

The game looks rather like a more conservative version of chess.

Delayed Defense Chess - Your opponent must experience you threatening his piece before you are allowed to capture it.

A simple demonstration, using the same opening (look how much more quickly captures occur; 'turn' is interpreted as from one turn to the next, or you have to wait half a turn before capturing).

1. P e2-e4 p d7-d5

2. White can not yet capture black.

2. N g1-f3 p d5xe4!

I also thought of the following illustration of Delayed Defense Chess:

Say there is a white rook on h1 and an enemy wazir on e8.

1. R h1-e1 w e8-e7

2. Rook can not yet capture wazir.

2. Re1-e6 (wazir can not yet capture rook because rook hasn't yet experienced wazir threatening it!)

2....w e7-e8

3. Rook takes wazir! ;-)

Comments or question? I'm playtesting the two now and even playtesting Delayed Attack Army vs. Delayed Defense Army. Who do you think will win? Anyone? Or do you think they should be even against each other?