New Position Workshop / Testing Thread

Sort:
BeautifulGoose
MrXX2018 a écrit :
BeautifulGoose написал:

i think we should add a king, and mabe a bishop or a knight

In setup chess you have to place the king

yea i didn't see that it was steup sorry

MrXX2018
BeautifulGoose написал:

this is not an dofficial submission, you don't need 10 testing games 

I know. I decided to play firstly and only then decide how good/bad it is. If I'll decide that everything is fine, I'll submit it immediately

TranKienKhangVN

Pawns promote to Elephant, Hawk, King, or Alibaba on the 8th rank.

Fairy-Stockfish evaluation (without NNUE): Evaluating... (Depth 37/99 ~ Unknown)

lukegk

Wow, this has died recently sad.png

lukegk

R-0,1,0,1-1,1,1,1-1,1,1,1-0,0,0,0-0-{'pawnBaseRank':5,'wb':true}-
x,x,x,yR,yN,yH,yQ,yK,yB,yN,yR,x,x,x/
x,x,x,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,3,x,4,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,1,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,1,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,4,x,3,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,8,x,x,x/
x,x,x,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,x,x,x/
x,x,x,rR,rN,rB,rQ,rK,rH,rN,rR,x,x,x

lukegk

What do you think?

lukegk

I want to call it Thermopylae but that's taken lol

Rafael0310

Rafael0310

Hi

Rafael0310

This is my custom positon

Rafael0310

What do you guys think about this position?

Rafael0310

rules:12 checks and 40 points for check mate

Spartakkus

Hi everybody,

Me and a friend have been playing several variations that we invented over a normal board. We are both around (1900) in normal chess so it gets very interesting at times. Neither of us are interested in programming or online constructing at all, so we normally don't do this at chess.com. However, of the variants we have been playing there's one that has emerged as more interesting, so I thought I could bring it up here. It is called HERO QING and contains the following modifications of normal chess.

1. Normal board, normal pieces, all chess rules apply (including check mate, castling and en passant) except those pertaining to the movements of the Qing:

2. The Qing moves like a queen, hence its name.

3. The Qing can deliver check, and check mate, to the opposing Qing.

4. It is only the Qing moving to threaten the other Qing that delivers check, the Qing that delivers check is not itself in check.

5. Always when in check, the Quing's capacity for escaping is enhanced by adding the jumping movements of chess knight, dabbaba and alfil, i.e. of a generalized jumper within the two step range.

Questions:

A. Do any of you find this interesting?

B. Can this be tested here, within the present possibilities?

C. What would have to be added on chess.com in order to test this here?

ALL THE BEST / J.F.S

JkCheeseChess

It doesn't seem to make sense that you can put your opponent in check but you wouldn't be in check on the same move. That would be like moving your king next to your opponent's king and "putting him in check" when your king is en prise at the same time. Disregarding this obvious issue, there is also the fact that it would be very hard to deliver a checkmate since the "Qing" has such a large move range, especially when escaping with the extra movesets as you put it.

It's an interesting idea for sure, but I think it generalizes the idea of chess way too much for it to be a playable skill-required variant and instead turns it into a luck-based game. It also cannot be tested with the present possibilities since we don't support your idea of "putting the opponent in check whilst not being in check yourself" (which to me doesn't make sense anyway).

Rafael0310

This is my positon

Rafael0310

Rafael0310

What do you guys think about this position?

Trento007
Rafael0310 wrote:

rules:12 checks and 40 points for check mate

it is an interesting board layout, but suffers from lack of pieces. essentially the game comes down to luck on which piece you are given, not always are the pieces equal in value even if you think they may be or otherwise considered to be. For example, my opinion is the rook/bishop knights are equal in most positions, however due to wall layouts I can assume the bishop is often better here. Camel knight is generally better but maybe not against similar value pieces as here. Overall the position needs more play for each side, a few minor pieces to help the attack potential of the royals, pawns are probably not necessary but would allow for a pressure mechanism between players requiring attacks before promotions become available.

upon testing the position I believe yellow should start opposite of blue, not near. my assumption is yellow loses here without just avoiding entirely

lukegk

R-0,1,0,1-1,1,1,1-1,1,1,1-0,0,0,0-0-{'pawnBaseRank':5,'wb':true,'dim':'4x8'}-
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,yB,yN,yK,yR,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,yP,yP,yP,yP,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,4,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,4,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,4,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,4,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,rP,rP,rP,rP,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,rB,rN,rK,rR,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x/
x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x

lukegk

Somebody has to have done this before...