[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Game Reviews by RobertoLavieri
This game is not so easy to play in the opening!, tactics are enterely different than in FIDE-Chess, and it is very easy lose material if you try to develop fast your pieces looking for suposed 'positional advantage' that, in the majority of the cases, it is not advantage of any class, much times you fall in exposed positions, it seems better play it in a somewhat conservative way, being very careful with the support to all your major pieces in play. If you take not care, you can be checkmated very soon. The average number of moves to finish a game can be of no more than 20 moves. this game is extremely dynamic, and it must be balanced with the usual rule: in the first move, White plays only one move. If not, White advantage is notorious in the opening. Surprisingly, e2-e4 does not seem to be the best first move in this game.
Greg, you are right, all pieces have rifle capture capabilities, but much more than this, power of pieces is not only extraordinary, it is augmented by the fact that you can move not only the same piece twice, but two consecutive moves with different pieces too. On an empty board, Queen and Rooks can reach ALL the rest of the squares (63!) from any initial position. Ends are a madness, and for this reason the games finish very soon, in very rare cases you can play a game which finishes in more than 25 moves!
Well, I`m not going to add news to the controversy about the first. This game, and Syncronous Chess are both very interesting and somewhat strange in its fundamental essence, i.e. syncrony, but some rules need to be precisely clarified. In XYMYX, castling and Pawn captures can show some bizarre situations in which it is not clear the correct move. Promotions and Checking the King too. It should be good an exhaustive explanation on the exact rules that applies in such rare cases.
Jumping Chess is not a bad game, the game play is very interesting, although it is undoubtely biased to defensive schemes if you want to have good chances of winning, but it is very strategic, perhaps much more than FIDE-Chess. If a player tries to play it using Michael Tal´s or Bobby Fischer´s styles, it is very possible it is going to be in disadvantage quickly. This game must be played a-la- Tigran Petrossian, for better possibilities.
Nice and interesting variant!. The only observation: In 'dense' games, it is always difficult to visualize all threatened squares in a good manner, making somwhat difficult the calculations. But the game play is incredibly rich. Try it and see!.
Looks interesting, but King is e1, Gnu in f2 seems to be a better initial setup.
Beautiful!. I have to play a test game to take a better idea. Is it going to be a ZRF available?. If not, I can try codifying it, but I´ll need a couple of weeks, I have some other things to do at first.
Be honest, this game is at least good (in my opinion, it is very good). I don´t rate it 'excellent' because there is a little detail that is not so easy to solve, and it is a relative weakness in the setup in the c-Pawn and in the h-Pawn. It is also a bit incomodious the first moves of the Bishops, because the player must take some care on the own Rooks and a possible attack by the opposite Bishops. The possible solution I thought, augmenting the power of Bishops allowing the one-step orthogonal movement for Bishops, may alter the good balance and harmony you can see in the game play, powered Bishops are much more valious than a Knight, and the game play itself may change significatively, although I don´t know, I have not tested it. On other hand, Falcon movement is nice and it seems well adapted to this game. My impression is that this is not a 'random' game, but a well thought and tested game, and possible improvements are not obvious.
I have tested it playing a couple of games against Zillions, and the game play is very nice, strategy and tactics are -sui generis- , adapted to the rules of this excellent game.
Really nice!, the only objection is about the TEN minutes rule (well, I know this is a 'ten' game for the contest), because this game should be better allowing a bit more amount of time, say 30 minutes at least. I`ll play a quick test this morning to see, I suppose it is going to be funny.
It seems to be interesting. I have a question: Can the Burakumin CAPTURE a piece ending on a square adjacent to other piece? . If not, I don`t understand well the other untouchability rule. This is the most strange piece in this game, and it is the need of some clarification about it. I wonder if the game play is better or not with this piece in scene, some tests are needed, but, by now, I like the fundamental ideas behind this game, as the promotion rules.
Well, I have tried a brief test using hand-made paper pieces in a 10x10 board. My impression is that the game is playable, although complicated and, definitely, different. There is not great clarity in the game, at least this is my impression, and it is possible there are too many pieces, I would simplify it. Instead of 1´s. 2´s, etc, I would use only one kind of 'Pawns', perhaps two, but not more, Merchant and Craftsman seeem to be sufficient. Burakumin is not a bad piece, it is interesting in the game, but it is the need of refine a bit the rules of movement, re-thinking the piece once the author make some tests until convinced about what he really wants to see and feel in the game play. This game needs some mastery to be played in a good manner, but it is not necessarily a bad characteristic, it is only a characteristic of the game, being different and relatively complex. Someone can try to code a ZRF, me included, once clarified enterely the game in base of the author´s entire satisfaction with it, but there are some complexities in the implementation, as I can see.
I haave tried another test game, and I´m understanding it better. Interesting and somewhat intriging. Burakumin is a strange piece in this game, it is more an obstacle for both bands than a piece for adding activity. The game is extremely positional, and not very easy to play in a good manner, I insist, it would be better with less piece types. Some refinements should be good, but the game, as is, is interesting enough. I encourage another people to try it. Mason: Have you played your game?. Tell us about your experieces with it. You are a good designer, go ahead!.
Yes, it can be good in 7x7, and Grey Whale Calf is a possibility, but adding a bit more power can be tested too, by example: allowing a two-squares-sliding forward movement for this piece. Some tests are needed. In the future, if I have some free time, I´ll try a ZRF, to see.
This game is really interesting. it should be good a Preset in Game Courier.
Top Grand-Masters are playing a Kriegspel Tournament in Amber!!!. Bareev beats Anand 2-0 in first round Kriegspiel, today... He may have finished at the bottom of the table in the Amber Blindfold and Rapid tournament, but Russian GM Evgeny Bareev started with a stunning 2-0 victory over Vishy Anand in the Kriegspiel section which started today in Monaco. He and Peter Leko (2-0 against Svidler) are expected to dominate. Bareev is a Kriegspel specialist, and for Anand this is his first contact with this variant. Gelfand is also playing Kriegspel at his first time, but he has shown a natural talent, he beated Topalov in the first round, but blundered in the second after consolidate a demolishing position against his rival. Almost all the rest of players have played Kriegspel at least once!.
This is a very interesting game, far from easy to play in a good manner. Material advantage should be good, but it is much less important than in FIDE-Chess. Defensive schemes can be good for a team in a slight disdvantage, because the superior team, if wants a victory, must attack, and always some weaknesses can appear, because pieces used in attacks can´t defend weak positions in many cases. The superior team can´t construct easely the victory positionally step by step as in FIDE-Chess. In Chess, the main mennace is the convertibility of the advantage in Pawns which can promote to Queens, here it is not the case, promotions add a bit more power, but not enough for a victory in many cases. Openings must be played carefully, conversions to Nightriders can cause serious damages to the enemy if he plays with some ingenuity about these pieces. isolated pieces are not good, and unprotected Kings are worse. Positions must change dinamically and mantaining reasonable solid structures, don´t stay with the same structure and pieces types all the time, some structures are more sensitive to some piece types, and other structures to other pieces. Every player must try to cover his weak points before attacks, or counter-attacks can be devasting... I have launched the idea of redefining the Super Cardinal as a class 6 piece, but it seems there is not consense. This is not only the most powerful piece in its class, but its power is almost the same as the class 6 Super-Chancellor. Super-Cardinals can cause demolishing effects in many ends, due the usual sparsity of the pieces, and a Queen is not equally comparable with it, because it is not only the mobility in consideration, but the potential attacks against the enemy King, considering that this piece can be dropped. Classes 7 and 8 seems to be unnecessary, in my opinion. I know that many players are not gained with the idea of re-defining the classes, but I want hear more opinions about it.
'Since this game is British in theme, the Bishops are Anglican instead of Catholic. Unlike the Catholic Bishops, who took a vow to remain on one color, the Anglican Bishops didn't make this vow'. Not of good taste this description of the piece, but, as a related notice, the new Pope is the ultra-conservator Joseph Ratzinger, from Germany.
Interesting. I like it. I have not tried this game yet, so the 'Good' rating may vary to 'Excellent'. It seems to be more difficult to play well than Amazons or Chess, at least at first view.
Well, this game is at least very original and it seeems really interesting at first view. I`m anxious to see the ZRF and game example, to take a better idea. Good job, Joost.
Another very original idea. I have to play it to see the game play details.
Is there a ZRF available for this game?. I think Mike Nelson was doing some related work, but I don`t know if it is finished.
Yes, this game is excellent, as usual Mike Nelson´s standards as games designer. I have to make an (perhaps unexpected) appretiation: I think this game, at high level of play, is not easy for a victory. Played by 'Masters', this game may be at least as drawish than FIDE-Chess. The reason is because promotions don´t add much power, and material advantage is less decisive than in Chess. In Chess, the potential danger of material advantage is its convertibility in Pawns, which can poromote to Queens or other valious pieces if necessary. In PMC, material convertibility is not as strong, and its decisiveness is less clear or slower. But Mastering this game must be much more difficult than mastering Chess, this game is much more rich in possibilities.
A very good (Excellent?) variant of Grand Chess, rich in possibilities, excellent initial set-up and with a smooth game play. I have to test it a few times more, my first experience against Zillions was a very extense game of 140 moves. (Zillions plays it relatively well, but with some ingenuity in position of pieces. Nevertheless, it was a hard-to-win test game)
I have played a test game (main variant) against Zillions. I could win after 278 moves, interesting game but really extense, and I think it is not casualty, it is very possible that the game tendence is to last a lot of moves. My opinion is that there are too many pieces, and perhaps the game works better in a slightly smaller board and with less pieces. I have not tried the (included) variant with less pieces, but I am sure the game lenght average is much less in this variant, I´ll try it soon.
I am very curious to see the ongoing game in the Courier System, I have not a clear idea about the game play, but I guess it may be very interesting, rich in possibilities, undoubtely deep and ...complex!.
Good game in a little board, very tactical, although very sensitive to clearly weak moves. I would try a version in 7x7 or 8x8, to see. I suppose the name is nice to hear, because it is in Klingon. The most similar to Klingon I have heard, apart from Star Trek, was a grabation of a mathematical conference by a japanese spokeman, running the grabation in reverse and slow velocity. Many people says it is a difficult-to-learn language. I am not sure, some babies months-aged speak something that can be, very probably, re-directed to Klingon by patient parents.
Some people has critiziced the initial setup. Others think that the Pawns in third rank and majority of bigger pieces in second is not the best idea. I strongly disagree, this game is excellent, and much more: for me, it is one of the best decimal variants ever made. The measures: the beauty, deepness and interest of an average game. Superb.
Many games with a missing central squares can give the players the feeling of a like-Circular-Chess game play. In this case, the pieces used look very interesting, and can add richness and beauty. I have not made tests, but my first subjective impresion is that the game play should be nice. Once I try it (if I have the time to do that, I´ll prepare a primitive ZRF this weekend, it looks relatively easy), the 'good' rating can change, I suspect that this game can be excellent, and my measure is my standard: Game play quality, in my personal opinion, of course.
Interesting, I have to play a test game to see details. Mike, I have tested CHESS V vs. ZILLIONS in ULTIMA. The results have shown notorious superiority of CHESS V: 10 to 0 !!!. Chess V plays ULTIMA quite well, Zillions plays it relatively weak, I have not problems to beat Zillions in every game I play against it, but I have troubles to beat CHESS V, I can not do that very often, say, one victory in four games I play against CHESS V, more or less. My estimated ratings in ULTIMA are: CHESS V between 2000-2200 ULTIMA ELO rating (Using FIDE-Chess terminology), and Zillions around 1700, perhaps less. I have not tested the rest of the games.
I don´t know how many users and members of TCVP have played this great game. I have only seen at brainking.com that Andreas has been an active Amazons player, with a good performance. The best rated Amazons player at brainking is Grim Reaper (Ed Trice) Total score: 269 wins, 17 draws, 0 losses. Impressively good score.
I have tested this game a few times, and I can say it is as good as Grand-Chess, although with a different taste. Yes, the game tendence is to moderately long games, with average of 100-120 moves to finish a good Opulent Chess game, but it does not demerit the game, the game play is very interesting, deep, rich and, yes, it is very strategic. I like it.
Interesting. I need some tests to take a better idea.
If you are interested in this popular territorial game and you are encouraged to try a very strong opponent, I suggest the AMAZONG Java applet that you can find at: jenslieberum.de/amazong/amazong.html AMAZONG is perhasp the strongest program playing Amazons now, nevertheless, it can be beated by humans, I have won a couple of times (but I have lost at least ten games against it). I think AMAZONG, under conventional time controls, plays at a level equivalent to 2400-2500 rating, translating it to Chess ELO, but the Java applet only uses a few seconds for each move, so the level is a bit lower, although it is strong enough, I believe not less than 2200. Try it!.
I have not played the game yet, it looks interesting, but I have the first impression that the average number of moves to finish a game would be high, not less than 120 moves. Has anoyone tried this game?.
Hasami Shogi is an interesting game, I don´t know about the origins, but it is very different from Shogi, so the name could be any other not associated with Shogi.There are other similar games. I have read that Mak-yek is played in Siam (and Malaysia under the name Apit-sodok) with the same goal, on the same board, but the 16 stones of each player are placed on the first and third row. The moves are the same, but the capture is custodian and also by intervention. Intervention capture is the opposite of custodian. If a stone moves between two enemy stones, it captures both stones. I have not played these variants, but my intuition says to me that they can be much more violent than HS.
Nice idea, Shogi is great by many reasons, but the relatively low power of many pieces is a special element of interest when there are drops, and Shatranj looks excellent for this purpose too. I have to play it to see how it works. My only observation: I prefer that after a Horse of Troy capture, it changes sides, but its contents are lost, i.e., it transforms to a single Knight.
It seems pretty interesting, although I have not played it yet. Intuitively, I only have doubts about the up-to-four stones on the basis, there are Camels and Zebras in the game, so power should be innecessarily high for a 7x7 game. I have to make some tests to see.
I don´t know whether some extensive computer analysis has been done for this game, the branching factor is by far much less than in chess. With the aid of actual technology, it seems to be a good project, perhaps factible, to determine if it its true of false the empirical suspect that the game is a forced win for White.
To see!. Yes, I think that the ZRF implementation could be challenging. The game itself looks interesting, but I have not had opportunity to make any kind of tests.
It looks very playable at first appearance, and I guess it is a good game, by genetical reasons. What about a ZRF, to see?
This game seems to be very strategic, perhaps a bit slow, but it does not affects the fun, this game, as is, seems to be very interesting. My experience with stones is not negative, I like these pieces if you want a less tactical and a more strategical game, but I admit that it can slow the game. I need some tests to evaluate better this game; for a while, a 'good' rating.
This game is a classic. It is very difficult to master, due the extreme deepness regardless you can finish a game in very few moves. On purpose of other Italian things, (caugh, caugh), see the sports news.
Very interesting!. Being me, I would put more mirrors, but it is fine as is now,
Well, I have tried this game briefly. I have to say it seems better than you can figure at first view. I may be influenced because I always rate good or excellent other progresive variants, but I feel this variant more nice to play.
That's a good idea. We need a new Page, what about 'Ultima Tips'-?. A good theoretical developement may need tons of material; some of us are moderately experienced players, but I�m sure we are not big authorities,and a theory developed by us may be biased, somewhat primitive and far from exhaustive and water-proof. I can do something about it time to time, I suppose that other experienced players here can do something too: Matthew, Antoine, some others and, generally, everybody who visit TCVP can give us something interesting...
I think this games is (perhaps more than FIDE-Chess) very sensitive to openings. You can be quickly in clear disadvantage after some weak opening moves. Some care is needed...
50 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.