[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Oops. I forgot while I was writing. There's a specific reason not to use Parton's fair race rule with an absolute doublemove game of Absolute Colorboundmost Chess. The reason is that symmetrical play gives Black a guaranteed draw!
In Absolutely Colorboundmost Chess, there must be as little interaction as possible between pieces on squares of different colors. As a consequence, there can be no Castling. A further consequence is that you should really play it on two boards, lest the visual clutter become a sort of interaction between the two colors. The big surpsise is that it must be a doublemove game, one move on each color. If you have only one move, and must decide between colors, that is a form of interaction! (Yes, that interaction would make a better game; but the absolute extreme colorboundmost chess has to be doublemove.) Your Q is on the same color as the enemy K. This means that you start with enough material superiority to mate the opponent -- but of course the reverse is also true! I see this as a race game (pushing the boundaries of race games!), and therefore immediately thought of Parton's 'Fair race rule' from Racing Kings: if W gives mate, Black can draw by giving mate in reply. (The question of who wins first is an interaction between the colors, but it is unavoidable in a chess variant.) However, since it's a doublemove game, an even better alternative is to make it 'balanced'. W only gets to make one move first turn. To avoid interaction, the rules must specify on which color W must move on the first turn! Of course all the pieces and Pawns and Kings must be colorbound. (Also, a game with weak interaction played as a singlemove game on a single board would be more interesting; but the first step is to define the most extremely absolute colorboundmost game possible!) Am I correct in thinking that all these consequences follow inevitably from the premise? Have I missed any? Is it interesting that this much of the game can be specified without even thinking about how individual pieces move?
3 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.