[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Game Reviews by RobertoLavieri
It seems to be a nice game. I figure it is much more complex than it looks at first view. I´m not sure if the throwing of two Stones adds too much to the game, the density grows quickly, and some tactics would be difficult to perform, so there is the need of some non-trivial planning from the beginnings. A question: Can Arikis throw only ONE stone?. Can they move without any throw?. I have not played a complete game yet, I have only moved the pieces for a while, taking an idea of the game play, but I think that it is very difficult reach the other side goal, it looks more easy the surrounding objective of the game. I spent one hour this afternoon trying to implement a primitive version of a ZRF, but I have had some troubles with it. My impression is that Zillions is going to be a poor Hanga Roa player, I don´t know if there is other person trying an implementation, but the main problem may be the incapacity of Zillions to avoid fast losing positions in this kind of games, because the objectives of it.
Is there a little bug in the ZRF with the one-step slide movement-?. If so, it is not difficult fixing it.
The game is excellent as it is -in its three variants-, and Ultima is, certainly, an extraordinary game too. These games are enterely different in the game play, and both are nice, each one with its own characteristics. No changes to any of them!.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Ultima is a great game, regardless the opinion of the author, Robert Abbot, about 'what is wrong with Ultima'. The case is that many people around the world plays Ultima, and accept the game as it is. The game play is closed almost all the time, and it is not easy win this game, and draw is the most possible result in many games between two experienced players playing more or less well. If someone wants an improvement that add richness to the game play without the loss of the philosophy and main ideas behind Ultima, perhaps the most simple way is introducing two pieces missing with Queen movement: First, the Advancer, and second, The FIDE-QUEEN!. The idea is reduce the number of Long-Leapers and Chameleons to only one each, it is not clear the need of two of them, as pointed out by Antoine Fourriere. I have pre-tested a version with this new elements, and the game play is nice, more dynamic than the original game, but you can feel the essence of Ultima regardless the new changes. But this idea, and perhaps any other, could find resistance by the relatively numerous fans of this game, that continue playing it, as originally born.
Michael, I think the Leo is a good idea, but it is the need of diminish a little its power in this game. Unfortunatelly, Leo can conduct many stages of the openings with attack of pieces and checkmate threats, with an initial advantage for White. On possibility is that it moves like Queen, but limiting its action: it need an ADJACENT intervening piece for attack the next positions. I´ll try both of them in the next days. As it can be easely noted when you try the variant, FIDE-Queen is very powerful in Ultima, surprisingly it looks much more powerful here than in FIDE-Chess, and it is certainly more powerful than the Long-Leaper. Advancer is a little weaker, but LEO would be at least as powerful than the Queen. Peter: I have dowloaded the Rococo variants. I have not tried it yet, but I have the intuitive idea that the Archer is great for this game, but I have serious doubts about the Bird. Other thing: I have my own Gallactic Graphics and board for Rococo. I´ll send a copy to David and you, although Alfaerie are very nice too.
Peter, I have played a few quick games against Zillions. I´m greatly surprised of the Archer, it fits perfectly in the game and it adds new nice alternatives. i like it. As suspected, Birds are much more powerful than needed for the game, for this reason I prefer undoubtely the Rococo-Archer, more than the Bird-Archer and more than the original Rococo, this piece adds a lot to the game. It was not clear why two Long-Leapers in Rococo. With the Archer, one Long-Leaper is enough, and it is not necessary answer why. About Ultima, it looks fine with the Queen and the Advancer, but due the power of Queen the game play is notoriously different than in Ultima, I like it. I have not tried the Leo or the weak Leo yet, I´ll try to make a primitive code in the next days, and see what happens.
Michael: I have had the idea of trying some Optima pieces for Ultima, too, although it seemed natural the first try with the FIDE-Queen, due the fact that all the pieces in Ultima move as the Queen. The Advancer looks fine in conjunction with the Queen (really good, you can essay), but I disagree with the presence of Withdrawer, it is a weak piece that is difficult to manage for attack (or defense!) purposes. I´m not enterely disconform with the Coordinator, it is a weak piece, but it adds some interesting possibilities to tactics. If you can suggest sustitutes to Withdrawer and Coordinator, or to the combination Queen-Advancer, I can test them in the context of the game. The idea is a game that preserves ULTIMA´s essence, but with a rich, relatively clear, nice and beautiful game play, usually the primary good ideas are not enough, one can be only convinced (perhaps never at all, due the self-criticism that acts as an impulse of human beings, looking always for better things) after some careful play-testing. We are trying to offer alternatives for a consolidated game with peculiar fans, We have did some things that I think are good, but it is ever a hard work redefining a game looking for improvements, because it is not easy stablish clearly the colective criteria, and what things are the things that the majorities really want.
Good family of games. Interesting and nice game play.
Grand Chess is a game that is widely played with the stablished rules. I think that castling in any way may be rejected by the majority of players, the central position of King gives a special flavor to the game, and many times you can construct defensive structures using the power of pieces. The game seems to be always in an inflexion point, where you must decide between attack, defense or both, making the game very deep. Surprisingly, attacks are not easy to perform, regardless the position of the King. This game is excellent, and variations are more a curiosity or an attempt to explore new ideas than real improvements.
This game was invented by Gianluca Vecchi in 1993, it is Chess with the rule: 'A piece can´t take another piece of the same type', more or less the same rule I adapted for Etcetera/Hexetera, although my two games have other pieces, other added rules and a clear oriental flavor. This rule enforces more positional games, and games in which sacrifices may be usual in the middle or end of games. I have noticed that this rule is particularily more interesting in games with a board of less dimensions. In 8x8 and Chess pieces, the result is that the average number of moves seems to increase significatively respect to Chess, but this is not demeriting per se, the game is really enjoyable.
We need a Preset in Courier for this extraordinary and simple variant of FIDE-Chess!
The rating 'excellent' is for the beautiful set of pieces!. (the game itself is very nice too, although more complex than it appears at first. It is not easy stablish strategies, and if both bands play well, the path for a victory may be relatively long, I think, but I´m not completely sure because I don´t know how to play it really well. Some experience is needed, without doubts...)
Interesting and nice game. My only observation is about the mass movement, I would prefer only lines of pieces, instead of rectangular masses. And, of course, there is also the practical reason: implementation in a computer program, or coding it in Zillions, is much more easy with lines instead of rectangular masses of pieces.
This game has merits to be in the main cathegory. Is anyone trying to implement it in Zillions or making a Courier Preset?. The last thing is easy, at least a Preset that does not enforce the rules. I´m busy now and I´ll be in the next days, so I have little time to give a hand on this. I think the Zillions implementation is a lot of work, although it is clearly possible. I have thought a bit about a Zillions implementation, but I have not time enough to make the effort for a code soon, so if there is anybody trying to do it, or a Courier Preset, it should be good. Let me know.
Well, it is finally released after a lot of changes and refinements, and never-end discutions with Antoine, who has a lot of the credit in the final version, with notorious differences with my first proposal. The community is invited to try this game, Zillions is not a very strong player of this game, but if you try it with Zillions, you are going to have an idea of this game. You may be surprised, it is really good, although this afirmation should seem not too modest, it is sincere. I like it. It is a Preset too, so this game is available to play in Courier.
This is one of the best mixtures of 'Oriental' and 'Western' Chess variant I have seen, not only the setup but the rules seem to be carefully designed. The result is a very strategic and positional game in which dynamics can be explosive after some point. Material advantages seem to be much less important and decisive than in Fide-Chess, but position is definitely much more important. The density of power is perhaps a bit high, but it is correct for the concept of the game, and it is one of the reasons because little material advantages are not decisive many times. I have one OBSERVATION on the Board used in Zillions implementation and in the Courier Preset: It is beautiful, but somewhat hypnotizing, and can confuse the player in some moments (Well, this is perhaps a very personal appretiation that is influenced by my ocular limitations: I´m very close to the line that divides, speaking about visual capacity, the more or less normal people, and functionally invidents. I expect I´ll be over the line for some years, but I don´t know how much time). Regardless the beauty of the board, I´ll suggest Fergus add any other set with a new plain board, perhaps using light colors, but just squares. I´ll appretiate it, much more than many other players, you must be sure.
This is a very interesting game, much more deep than FIDE-Chess. Try it!.
This is an interesting game, and ends are far from trivial. The observation I can see is that a draw may be the most possible result in almost all the games, if both teams play the game more or less decently, it is not so easy a win in many ends.
I have played a test game against Zillions, and I liked it. Enjoyable, although the game was a little extense, around 120 moves. I´ll test it again soon.
Unicorn Great Chess is excellent. I think the table of value conversions given by Moussambani is, gross speaking, correct. Unicorn value is a bit less than that of a Queen, and in a 10x10 Board the Queen value is more or less the same of two Rooks or three minor pieces. Lion value is approximately the same of the Bishop value, and it is higher than the Knight value.
It is not easy stablish the value of pieces in this nice game, because it depends strongly in position and in the total amount of pieces in the game. Cannon and Vao are very powerful pieces when there are many pieces in the game, but its value diminishes a lot once the game is becoming sparse. Queens are not very powerful in the initial moves, in fact, it is an uncomfortable piece when there is a high density of pieces in the game, but its value increases progressively when the game is going to simplified stages. This is a game with an initial high density of power, because Cannons and Vaos are very powerful at the beginnings. Kings are vulnerable enough, and many pieces can be tactically attacked soon, and by this reason material advantages are not as important than positional advantages. I am not going to give a table of values for this game, I think it would be of little help as orientation, the value of pieces is a function of position and the pieces in play in any moment. This criterium applies to some other games like Chess in a Larger Board with no so Few Pieces Added and Symmetron!112, between many others.
This game is very interesting and certainly playable. It is not easy construct a game without captures, without promotions or demotions wich can be a good game, and this is!. Enjoyable inspiration of Antoine!. Zillions is not a strong player, if you are tempted to try the ZRF implementation.
Amazons is a great game. I can´t say it is a Chess Variant, the game is of territorial nature, and it is perhaps more close to Go. This game is moderately popular, perhaps more in South America than in other lands, I have seen it passionately played by a few universitary students, but it is not still a very diffused game, though. It is not easy implement a good program which plays Amazons well, but I have seen a couple of free decently strong programs for this game. You can try YAMAZON (v0.48), by Hiroshi Yamashita (http://www32.ocn.ne.jp/~yss/index.html), a very good contendor and a real challenge for intermediate players, and the reasonable strong program INVADER (v 2.1), by Richard Lorentz, which plays Amazon in a board of NxM http://www.csun.edu/~lorentz/amazon.htm). If you try these programs you are going to be greatly surprised, unless you are a very high-level player.
Whale Shogi is a very good game. A ZRF would not be very difficult, I´m sorry I have not time enough to do it, for a while, but perhaps other people can be encouraged to write the code.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.