This is because I am not allowed to submit this variant again on Variants world as this variant was declined due to my ban. This feedback will help create the final product different to the original variant that I can submit.
Status: Declined
While we found the concept of atomic with weak pieces very interesting, unfortunately there are some severe issues with this variant that we found during testing.
First of all, in the opening red can push their soldier to a4, forcing a trade with a sergeant, and same can be done on the other side for yellow. Since this is a beneficial trade, most high quality games end up having the same sequence of starting moves which makes the opening forced.
Second of all, the wazirs in the center are very redundant. The best way to play for red and yellow is to wait for your opponent to clear the center by giving up their berolina pawn, so in high quality games with both sides avoiding the trade, it results in a closed center and very cramped piece play, since placing pieces near wazirs may end up in a piece loss.
This bridges into the next issue with this variant: the gameplay is not unique in any way, mainly caused by how cramped the game is and the fact that comebacks here are impossible. If you get checked once, you end up losing because there are no good defenders on the board. Most flank attacks are very repetitive here, and that makes the nature of this game pretty generic.
Finally, we found the hill redundant in testing games, and it is practically impossible to reach it in games, mainly because it has way too many defenders and king’s flank does not have good attackers since the sergeant gets traded off immediately. Any attempts of even getting close to the hill end up in a loss by N-check.
A suggestion for a revision would be expanding the board and making the gameplay more unique by experimenting with the piece choice, gamerules and board size. We hope to see a revision of this variant
Variants.Universe ID #10025
WoF - Tiny Atomici
Time Control: 30s | 1
Gamerules: 10th, 3-check, Promotion to Ferz, King, Xiangqi Horse or Wazir, Atomic, KotH(e6,j9), Play for Mate, Stalemate win
Games in https://variants.world/posts/1484
This is because I am not allowed to submit this variant again on Variants world as this variant was declined due to my ban. This feedback will help create the final product different to the original variant that I can submit.
Status: Declined
While we found the concept of atomic with weak pieces very interesting, unfortunately there are some severe issues with this variant that we found during testing.
First of all, in the opening red can push their soldier to a4, forcing a trade with a sergeant, and same can be done on the other side for yellow. Since this is a beneficial trade, most high quality games end up having the same sequence of starting moves which makes the opening forced.
Second of all, the wazirs in the center are very redundant. The best way to play for red and yellow is to wait for your opponent to clear the center by giving up their berolina pawn, so in high quality games with both sides avoiding the trade, it results in a closed center and very cramped piece play, since placing pieces near wazirs may end up in a piece loss.
This bridges into the next issue with this variant: the gameplay is not unique in any way, mainly caused by how cramped the game is and the fact that comebacks here are impossible. If you get checked once, you end up losing because there are no good defenders on the board. Most flank attacks are very repetitive here, and that makes the nature of this game pretty generic.
Finally, we found the hill redundant in testing games, and it is practically impossible to reach it in games, mainly because it has way too many defenders and king’s flank does not have good attackers since the sergeant gets traded off immediately. Any attempts of even getting close to the hill end up in a loss by N-check.
A suggestion for a revision would be expanding the board and making the gameplay more unique by experimenting with the piece choice, gamerules and board size. We hope to see a revision of this variant