Check out Grant Acedrex, our featured variant for April, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier
Colorbound Chess. (Updated!) Pieces never change their squares’ color, so army is divided into two halves – attacking and defending. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Diceroller is Fire wrote on Mon, Feb 12 07:34 PM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from 04:42 PM:

Bracket notation there sucks up, so thank you for the 8x8’s notation. Second

  • should include both steps, but camel-wise and then ibis-like
  • current is wrong because is (6,9) instead of (3,9)

thx for effort anyway;)


Bob Greenwade wrote on Mon, Feb 12 04:42 PM UTC in reply to Diceroller is Fire from 07:16 AM:

Oh, I'd misunderstood it (my error); it's kind of like a "Parabolic Rider." If bracket notation were fully implemented, the 8x8 could be done with [F?C], but that doesn't work right now, so you'd need FafmpafsmpafF. I think the 10x10 ([F?C?NX]) would be FafmpafsmpafafmpafsmpafmpafmpafF. I'm not ready to calculate out the larger [F?C?NX?FXX] (16x16).


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Mon, Feb 12 07:16 AM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from Sun Feb 11 09:39 PM:

Read the page properly. Parabola doesn’t leap, step must free to let go farther


Bob Greenwade wrote on Sun, Feb 11 09:39 PM UTC in reply to Diceroller is Fire from 08:58 PM:

On this board, the XBetza would be FDY. You'd have to use a 10x10 board to get that (3,9) leap you mention, making it FDYGXX. (The next step up, if my figures are correct, would be FDYGXXAYXXXX, requiring at least 17x17.)


🔔Notification on Sun, Feb 11 09:00 PM UTC:

The author, Lev Grigoriev, has updated this page.


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Sun, Feb 11 08:58 PM UTC:

Is Parabola embeddable as XBetza?


A. M. DeWitt wrote on Sat, Feb 10 02:45 PM UTC in reply to Diceroller is Fire from Thu Feb 8 09:18 PM:

I have approved this page.

Some of your wording could use some work, again owing to your Russian roots. However, the page does its job.


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Thu, Feb 8 09:18 PM UTC in reply to A. M. DeWitt from 07:44 PM:

Just a thought, but it would probably work better to either:

Have all pieces on the same color Have two Kings, one for each color, and only require one of them to be checkmated to win. This is since only half the army can reach the enemy King in the current version, and would be quite drawish if that half got depleted.

The page works quite well in presentation though.

Added second thought as a variation.


A. M. DeWitt wrote on Thu, Feb 8 07:44 PM UTC:

This is rather intriguing.

Just a thought, but it would probably work better to either:

  • Have all pieces on the same color
  • Have two Kings, one for each color, and only require one of them to be checkmated to win.

This is since only half the army can reach the enemy King in the current version, and would be quite drawish if that half got depleted.

The page works quite well in presentation though.

Also, when you modify a page, if you change the Modification date in its metadata so that it is more recent, you can push it closer to the top of the Unprocessed Submissions list.


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Wed, Feb 7 07:51 PM UTC:

Please review this page…)


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Wed, Feb 7 11:27 AM UTC:

This page is ready for your review, please look at it.


Diceroller is Fire wrote on Fri, Feb 2 09:18 PM UTC:

Images of pieces are not yet made, but can you review – is the text acceptable?


12 comments displayed

Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.