I never said that hexagonal topology is unplayable, my note was of the initial position, which makes that setup unplayable. I mentioned it as an example that even a common variant cannot be free from flaws, which makes it extremely difficult to invent a chess alike game that would be as good and interesting as orthodox chess. That's the sad truth, why chess variants are not as popular as they should actually be, like the variations on any other sport. I know from my playing experience that if a good player cannot do it well on hexagons, he's not a good chess player.
By mentioning 8x8 I didn't mean 'larger'. That's also a problem for this medium, and I don't like large variants except for Gross Chess and a few others.
I meant, 'different'.
Ideas that don't work, no matter how original, are not really of interest, IMO. If they could be made to work in another context, then just present those ideas in that context. If they are really worth persuing, that should not be too difficult.
That's not the idea that doesn't work, the setup which was the simplest way to show that, together with the others, and there was a disclaimer on it. That's what I wanted to do initially. That was just a live idea in a dead way which I thought to be the most simple.
By the way, if something works, I'm not interested in how difficult it is for someone if the difficulty comes from the natural organization, not just an attempt to make a really big playing field. That's not the case for this one though. Forget it.
Since I already explored most of the possibilities of hexagonal tesselation, I want to explore new spaces. As many as I can. The Wild West of chess. That's what drives it. If it is not what works here, I may leave.
The problem with Capablanca chess is the fact that on the first move, I can attack the unprotected black pawn, which leads to forced progressions. Ed Trice showcased them quite well. It may not be a flaw, but it is definitely a problem. People will simply exchange their chancellors and everything continues on the same, but worse, playing field.
I never said that hexagonal topology is unplayable, my note was of the initial position, which makes that setup unplayable. I mentioned it as an example that even a common variant cannot be free from flaws, which makes it extremely difficult to invent a chess alike game that would be as good and interesting as orthodox chess. That's the sad truth, why chess variants are not as popular as they should actually be, like the variations on any other sport. I know from my playing experience that if a good player cannot do it well on hexagons, he's not a good chess player.
By mentioning 8x8 I didn't mean 'larger'. That's also a problem for this medium, and I don't like large variants except for Gross Chess and a few others.
I meant, 'different'.
That's not the idea that doesn't work, the setup which was the simplest way to show that, together with the others, and there was a disclaimer on it. That's what I wanted to do initially. That was just a live idea in a dead way which I thought to be the most simple.
By the way, if something works, I'm not interested in how difficult it is for someone if the difficulty comes from the natural organization, not just an attempt to make a really big playing field. That's not the case for this one though. Forget it.
Since I already explored most of the possibilities of hexagonal tesselation, I want to explore new spaces. As many as I can. The Wild West of chess. That's what drives it. If it is not what works here, I may leave.
The problem with Capablanca chess is the fact that on the first move, I can attack the unprotected black pawn, which leads to forced progressions. Ed Trice showcased them quite well. It may not be a flaw, but it is definitely a problem. People will simply exchange their chancellors and everything continues on the same, but worse, playing field.