Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

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.

Super-alibaba:
average mobility: 11.81
average safe checks: 5.25
average directions attacked: 11.81
average squares attacked: 11.81

Directions attacked:
Yes, I should better define a 'direction'.  By my definition, the four
directions attacked by a rook are different than the four directions
attacked by a dabbabah-rider.  This is intentional because the directions
attacked is a measure of forking power...  The super-alibaba can
theoretically fork 16 different pieces, so it attacks in 16 different
directions.  This definition is also essential because these numbers are
all calculated by ChessV, and ChessV must consider them to be different
directions -- directions are used in generation of moves/captures, and a
piece which blocks a wazir-rider doesn't necessarily block a
dabbabah-rider.

Greg,

Excellent work in doing all the calculations. 

Your figures confirm my designer's intuition that the value classes
(desinged based on Betza's atomic theory of piece values, with no
detailed math) are well-defined and playable. The worst case scenario is a
discrepancy of 1.47 mobility between Nightrider and SuperBishop in class 3.
This is vitually identical to the smallest difference between two pieces of
differnt classes: 1.48 betweenS SuperCardinal (class 5) and ChancellorRider
(class 6). 

However, some hard to quantify but very real values tend to narrow the
former gap and widen the latter: 

The Nightrider is particularly strong in the opening and as a drop
piece--this brings it closer to the SuperBishop which is not particularly
outstanding in either respect (though hardly poor). 

The ChancellorRider has a Rook move, so it has King Interdiction power
(the ability to prevent a King from crossing a rank or file covered by a
Rook move, thus confining it to a restricted area of the board). As the
SuperCardinal does not have King Interdiction power, this gap widens.

This is a very interesting game. I look forward to playing it in GCT #2.

Below is a list of mobility values for all the pieces in Pocket Mutation, as well as a few Chess-With-Different-Armies pieces at the bottom for comparison. The 'average mobility' column is a Betza Mobility Calculation with a magic number of 0.7. This is probably the best estimation of the value of the piece. The second column is the average number of checks this piece delivers on an empty board without being counter-attacked. The third column is the average number of different 'directions' in which this piece attacks. The fourth column is the average number of squares attacked on an empty board.

I have an idea for Pocket Mutation Demotion Chessgi. It will use the same
pieces and value classes as PM. 

The rules for using the pocket are expanded:

When you capture an enemy pawn, it is removed from the game. If you
capture any other enemy piece, it is demoted to the next lower value
class, mutated to a friendly piece of your choice in that class, and put
in your pocket. This is mandatory even if your pocket is not empty and
will cause the removal of any piece in your pocket from the game. 

Notice how you can't put a strong piece in the pocket and wait around for
a good drop--in effect you can only capture pawns as long a s that strong
piece is there.

Imagine having a Queen in your Pocket and the opponent checks with a
Knight and the only counter is to capture the Knight. At the cost of a
Knight, the enemy has changed your Queen into a pawn!

1. P b2-b3 
1... p d7-d5 
2. R a1-p1; I-p1 // pocket nightrider 
2... b c8-d7 
3. I p1-b2 //  is a PMChess Fool's Mate.  Neat!

This variant has the potential to go beyond excellent. Bringing Class 4 up to four pieces yields 21 different pieces for the game, including the King. And 21, being the product of the magic numbers 3 and 7, makes a traditional choice for a complete set. I suggest adding the SuperAlibaba to Class 4, as its WFAD moves make a nice change from long range pieces.

Carlos, 

Yes and No.

FIDE Chess rules apply to Pocket Mutation Chessexcept where otherwise
stated.

Under current FIDE rules, perpetual check is not a draw in and of itself
(it once was), but if you are able to give perpetual check, you can always
force triple repetition or the 50-move rule, both of which are draws. 

Note that Pocket Mutation's 50-move rule is different from FIDE:
promotions and captures reset the move count, but Pawn moves do not.

Promotion via mutation is mandatory when pocketing a piece on the eight
rank, excepting the case of the AmazonRider which can be pocketed form
the
eighth rank without promoting since there is no higher rank for it to
promote to. A variant you where promotion is optional also has a great
deal of merit.

Your proposed SuperNightRider would be value class 5.  A Nightrider-Ferz
or Nightrider-Wazir would be class 4, as would a SuperKnight.

Is mutuation when pocketing a piece from the eighth rank optional or
mandatory?  For example, White pockets a KnightRider from a8 -- does he
have the option of retaining a KnightRider or is he forced to 'upgrade'
to a Cardinal or SuperRook.  White may find the NR ability too useful to
give up.

What if you added a new Piece, the 'SuperKnightRider', or 'KingRider',
which moves as King or KnightRider?  Would this be approximately the right
strength for a Class 4 Piece?  If you think it is too strong, perhaps a
FerzRider or WazirRider would be better.

I hav submitted the corrections to the editors. It is a good change in that
reducing White's opening advantage is always a good thing.

However, the original rules do not give White a win.  Black can maintain
equality by symmetrical play. The early loss of one Rook on each side is a
bit of a flaw, though.

In the revised rules, White is safe from the Nightrider attack if he opens
Pawn d2-d4 or Pawn e2-e4. This covers one fork point and he has the tempo
to cover the other if Black mutates a Rook to Nightrider.  Since these are
reasonable opening moves anyway, diffusing the Nightrider threat costs
White little or nothing--this makes for a very balanced game.

Antoine raises a good point.  Consider it done. Rule 2 is amended to read:
'If a player's pocket is empty, the player may remove any of his pieces
(except his King) from the board and put it in his pocket as a move. White
may not use the pocket for the first move.'

I will also submit a corrected ZRF when I am able.

I'm presently losing my game of Pocket Mutation Chess against Peter
Aronson in Invent-and-Play Section 2, and it is obviously a very enjoyable game.
I blew up my position at move 5:

1. Rook h1 - WP = Nightrider
1. Pawn d7 - d5
2. Nightrider WP - f4
2. Queen d8 - BP = CardinalRider
3. Rook a1 - WP = SuperBishop
3. Pawn g7 - g6
4. SuperBishop WP - e5
4. Knight g8 - f6
5. SuperBishop e5 x c7 ??
5. CardinalRider BP - g5
6. Knight g1 - f3
6. CardinalRider g5 x c7...

Despite this outcome, I am afraid that the sole advantage of being White
was bound to give me a quick win. (Peter is not so sure.) The Nightrider
can be dropped on c4, threatening King and Rook, or f4, threatening Queen
and Rook. It is forking a fork, so to say.
So, I think that White should be barred from using the Pocket at his
first move. (Peter agrees with me on this.)