Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
We still have 7 games of Pocket Mutation Chess scheduled in Game Courier Tournament #3. These should answer some questions.
Just try a game with Jeremy (chose white and DON'T make rook->'nightrider in pocket' move early in the game) and you will see for yourself... Still, I think the game is balanced since white can prevent early forks by black nightrider and have time to pocket nightrider from rook as well. The only problem with this game is a lack of variety in the opening, since the majority of the game starts with pocketing nightrider.
I think this is an excellent game as is, although I am eager to see Mike's new piece sets. [Great to see you back, Mike!] This is also such an excellent game concept that's it's almost impossible to resist speculating about different pieces and piece sets; 'Alternate Pockets' can easily become as varied as Betza's Different Armies, in its own twisted way. And I suspect the 'Mutant Armies' can be at least as difficult to balance as the Different Armies. But I'm sure some of us can have fun trying. On the nightrider vs rook question, what are the weaknesses of pocketing the opposing rook's pawn after a rook is pocketed and mutated to NN? This threatens RxP, then R-R8 on a following move. The rook is not a bad piece in PM, it pins pieces and projects power along a line very well. The nightrider has a different job, leaping around, forking pieces, and generally making a nuisance of itself. But, a player can do a pretty fair job of covering the back few rows against knight attacks well into midgame, no? If that's so, then the NN 'avantage' is gone from the early game. What's so overwhelming about the NN that it is necessary to change a rook to one?
I agree with Jeremy that nightrider is more valuable than rook in this game. May be its value is somewhere between rook and cardinal: * rook - 5 pawns * nightrider - 6 pawns * cardinal - 7 pawns. So, moving all nightrider-combined pieces one class up will probably improve this game. In any case, this will avoid that most of the game start with rook->nightrider pocketing as of now. Certainly, some play-testing is needed to see if really there are situations where you will prefer nightrider over cardinal. Other possible alternatives: 1) Add a new piece class between classes 3 and 4 and move nightrider and SuperRook there. 2) Remove nightrider-combined pieces completely to simplify the game and make it more strategic.
I'm very excited to know that you plan to do more work on Pocket Mutation Chess.
I love Pocket Mutation Chess very much and the 'Excellent' rating I gave it earlier still holds for me. I'm in no way disillusioned. I would really like to see an expanded piece set, rather than alternate piece sets. Joe Joyce believes (and he's obviously quite right) that many short range pieces can compete well against the longer range ones. As evidence, he proffers 'Shatranjian Shooters' CDA and even has a hard time paring down the short range pieces enough to be soft enough to compete against the FIDEs. In other words, short range pieces can compete very effectively against rider pieces. Those who favor short range pieces can enjoy playing against those who favor longer range ones.
I see that you're already committed to a project but I also have talked about wanting to work on a version of Pocket Mutation Chess variant, recently on the chessvariants yahoogroup. This was in response to an email written by Joe Joyce in which he says that Pocket Mutation Chess is his 'favorite chess variant.' Joe there describes it beautifully as a 'fantasy variant' of 'Chess with Changing Armies.'
I propose having more classes, including one or two below (!) pawn (e.g., spacious wazir and lame dabbabas -- of course to be able to put such pieces on the board, you would have to start with one or two very weak ones) and two or three above Amazonrider.
Also, I favor having more pieces in each class, at least five per class. For example: In class 1, there are at least a few more types of pawns you could have, the most obvious ones that come to mind are chinese pawns and berolina pawns.
Thinking it over, I would really like to see nightriders put into Class 4. Then, a nightrider could only come on the board after a Class 3 piece gets to the eighth rank. Being able to pocket your rooks and change them into nightriders immediately really forces your opposing player to protect their bishop five squares (c5, f5 for white, c4, f4 for black).
Likewise, I would shift Cardinalrider into Class 6 (othwerwise queen could immediately turn into cardinalrider), therefore Chancellorrider and Supercardinalrider into Class 7, etc.
There might even be some classes of pieces subtly different enough to fit in between some of the classes you have already.
Obviously this is a variant where the relative values of the pieces matters tremendously. And therein lies much of its appeal because the relative values of pieces is already of paramount importance to any true chess enthusiast.
Michael, email me, please, if you're interested in discussing these things with me more. (I hope you will.)
I'm working on a couple of additional piece sets for PM. One is part of the Short Range Project and the other eliminates Nightriders and provides additional enhancements. In both cases I expect a more strategic, less explosive game. I am in no way dissatisfied with the classic piece set, I just think providing some alternatives will be interesting for players who like the game concept but would prefer a different feel. When I have them worked up I will amend the game page and submit a new ZRF.
Even in FIDE Chess, I like to play 1.d4 and 2.e3 with the White pieces. In PMChess I may also pocket the Bishop on (c1), changing it to a Knight. My style of play does not leave many holes for Nightriders to exploit.
At various times Joe Joyce, Greg Strong and myself have stated that it may be unwise to start the game by pocketing a Rook and changing it to Nightrider. As Greg once pointed out, the Nightrider is most powerful when you are holding it in the pocket, but this means that you cannot use the pocket for any other purpose while you are waiting.
Also, I am a big fan of the SuperBishop (Dragon Horse), which is the most powerful [Class 3] piece in 'normal' chessvariants, that do not allow dropping pieces. See this game - 287 days ago for a Nightrider and a SuperBishop working together to win the game. On the other hand, in [Class 5] I prefer the CardinalRider (Unicorn) to the SuperCardinal (which Roberto Lavieri praises in his 2005-04-19 comment). We are a long way from reaching a concensus on piece values in this excellent game.
Yes, maybe expanding the piece types (and classes) would allow tactics to overwhelm strategy.
Your discussion suggests an idea to me, which may characterize either this variant or one similar to it. It is the idea of the wizard's duel, like the one Merlin had against Madam Mim in the movie Sword in the Stone, where they change into different animals, each appropriate to do combat against the other.
Note: Michael Nelson also invented an excellent variant called Wizard's War as it so happens. It doesn't increase greatly the kind of pieces and the wizards aren't themselves chameleons, but they are interesting generator pieces.
Yes, definitely a great game - (I won't rate it here, because I've already provided an excellent rating previously.) I am not sure that it is a good idea to add more pieces, though. Going too far in that direction sacrafices strategy for tactics, with a player looking through all the pieces for the one that attacks just the right combination of squares. Then one would have to pay very defencively, always keeping all pieces protected, lest he open himself up to a viscious fork by some strange piece, like a knight+alfilrider...
One of the best variants, certainly and Michael Nelson, I think, is also one of the best variant designers.
I would like to see an expanded (more complete) list of pieces added to the classes.
Also, maybe an extension for some of the more powerful pieces, as with tripunch pieces and cylindrical / toroidal pieces? Would be fun to have classes 9 and even 10.
Abdul, can you please tell me what you mean by superknight and supernightrider?
Just want to know.
I am most honored that Pocket Mutation Chess was selected as the newest Recognized Chess Variant and the voted Recognized Variant of the Month the first time out. Clearly PM is my finest creation but I never imagined it would join such august company in under three years.
Thanks to Joe and Roberto for your comments. Roberto's comment about drawishness is true with regard to a certain type of middlegame--the complex middlegame where both sides find launching an attack too dangerous. The endgame however is not drawish at all--virtually all endgames are decisive. King vs anything is a win for the stronger side--you just drop, promote, drop promote until you have enopugh force for a mate. The lone King can't defend the whole back rank. This being true, many times a numerical advantage in pieces can be translated into a win (whether or not it is a meterial advantage). An example: often the simplest way to win King, Queen, and Knight vs King and Rook is to exchange the Queen for the Rook, which is a draw in FIDE.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.