I've been in an analysis. It said that we need 4 queens to imprison a rook and 3 queens to do so with a bishop. Therefore it's able to put in a game. Such as in a standard chess, if both of 2 players move exactly, it's normally ended with a draw.
P/S: @thenomalnoob, not @thenormalnoob XD
With this game, now we know that rooks are hard to capture in the endgame. I don't see anything wrong with this.
Just like Petrified chess, IMO it goes in the wrong direction with the point based system just because they're afraid of draws. The point system kills the spirit of Petrified chess.
how about you add N-check, like 7 checks or something, you would have to keep a hidden counter off to your side(so your opponent doesn't know when they check your king) but you would die when that counter runs out. this would mean any piece could be chosen, except queen because to chose the more powerful pieces limits your army by not wanting them out in the open.
Imo getting up 4 queens is a bit much. I personally think this variant might need some updates in certain areas
I think bare piece rule would work well to stop issues like this, but there may also be some unintended consequences with that
That's kind of the problem with major pieces lol
Maybe, rather than making ahab chess its own game, you could consider making it a game rule instead and apply it to a variant where none of the pieces are worth more than 5 points, like chaturanga (all pieces are weak enough that you don't have to worry about draws like this)
Doesn’t chaturanga still have rooms though?
The check number would need to be pretty high so that you can still put your Ahab in danger if you want. But then that leaves the question, if you put your Ahab in check, and it stays in check, does it continually register as multiple checks?
or you can just ban people from using major/long-range pieces as their ahab
I personally think we should keep the Rook as Ahab
I personally think we should keep the Rook as Ahab
but it is just a draw
I personally think we should keep the Rook as Ahab
but it is just a draw
Not necessarily
I personally think we should keep the Rook as Ahab
but it is just a draw
Not necessarily
Yeah it basically is unless you are up 4 queens which is really not possible
see luke the thing with long-range pieces is that it's impossible to corner them unless you have enough pieces to cover all the squares.
and i assume 4 queens is the bare minimum, assuming the rook is in the corner, but in reality you'd probably need more than 5
I was thinking it was just two rooks and a pawn
010 Typewriter44 vs EvidentRoad
https://www.chess.com/variants/custom/game/51500255/120/3
So, I got a message from @EvidentRoad (Devon) sending me this test game that he played. Both players selected their rooks as Ahabs, and the game became a draw at the end, even when Devon was down by a full queen. The concern (which I believe another member also foresaw, @thenormalnoob if memory serves) is that the rook is powerful enough that a draw could be forced every time no matter how badly a person plays, because in an endgame it would be almost impossible to corner and capture. This also brings up concerns for the bishop, because it has similar mobility.
I'd like multiple people to watch through this game and analyze it, and also consider this while playing test games of your own. We may need to adjust the rules to where you can only select from the minor pieces. But we also need to test with the bishop, because if you can't pick rook or bishop, then this variant would be down to just pawns and knights (and possibly the king), at which point the variant would be essentially gutted.
Thanks Devon and Type for the test game and finding this potential flaw, and thanks everyone else for helping me look into it more and see what we can do to address any issues.