h a l f b a k e r yThe phrase 'crumpled heap' comes to mind.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
The game starts with an empty board.
White begins by placing any of his/her
pieces on any square he/she desires.
Then black does the same. Until all 32
pieces have been placed. Then the game
begins.
1st variation: like in battleship. You divide
the board with another board so that
it is
impossible to see where the other player is
placing his pieces.
2nd variation: white starts. black must
mirror with exact converse position.
Then, black places a piece where he
chooses. and so on. this should end up
with both sides being the same at the start
of play.
3rd variation: you can either place a piece
on the board or make a move. If a piece is
captured during this phase of the game, it
may not be re-entered (other than through
promotion)
4th variation: you place your opponents
pieces.
5th variation: you must place your pieces
in a particular order, e.g., first the king,
then queen, etc.
Unachess
http://www.chessvar...p.dir/unachess.html
Nearly exactly the same thing - my idea is defintely halfbaked there [Goesta Berling, Jan 05 2005]
[link]
|
| |
6th variation: you may also place your opponent's piece where you choose. |
|
| |
7th variation: players have a rating, and the lower rated player gets to place more pieces last. |
|
| |
Have you searched chessvariants.com ? I would be surprised if this weren't already halfbaked there. |
|
| |
[neilp] no, 6th = 4th + 0th |
|
| |
Unless the king was placed last, a game might be very short. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to figure out a way to keep your opponent's king in check for the duration of the first move - also knowledge of whether you go first might allow you the luxury of adopting a more aggressive play than traditional chess, with your opponent forced into a defensive role from the placement of the very first piece. It could be an interesting variation. |
|
| |
Maybe the king goes on its normal square and you just place the other pieces. |
|
| |
I also envision (and look forward to) massive pawn wars, where solid blocks of pawns controlled by each side attack each other. |
|
| |
thanks for the pointer to
chessvariants.com. As you can see
from the link I added, the idea I present
is halfbaked there. |
|
| |
Fantastic idea. I'm going to bun this even though its been baked, because I hadnt heard of it. Cant wait to try it. |
|
| |
I've got to be able to beat Deep Blue at one of these. |
|
| |
I quite like the first variation: must try it.
8th variation (for cheaters), place both your own and your opponents pieces (if you ever saw Laurel & Hardy/ noughts and crosses in the boat, you will know what I mean). |
|
| |
Yet another variation (#9?) - might address zen_tom's concern. First move, you can only place your piece on the row closest to you. Second move, only the two closest rows, third move, closest three... |
|
| |
the link from GB seems to suggest that this is not original or am I missing something? |
|
| |
baked. neat, but baked, and so boned here.[-] This here HB is for new ideas. |
|
| |
BTW: If you like chess variants, another one I've done way back is "diversity" chess, where at the start you mix up the colors randomly, but place the pieces as they should be. Most players will remember easily whose pieces are whose, but any "kibitzers" passing by will be unable to give you wise advice. |
|
| |
Another baked variant is to have "reverse" chess, where the object is to lose all you pieces and if you can-take you must-take. |
|
| |
po and sophocles - the basic idea is
baked. However, the variations (e.g.,
#1) may not be. |
|
| |
speed chess: each player must make their move within three seconds. |
|
| |
three quick seconds, mind |
|
| |
i like to play this variation because i'm generally not very good at chess, and this introduces a element of luck. |
|
| |
Luck, yes. But you're in trouble if you play someone with better knowledge of openings than you. |
|
| |