I would like to check these rules in reliable source.
If the black king can enter check in his first step or not is crucial for white's strategy and overall game balance.
White gets all of his pieces in the beginning and gets one move per turn. Black gets a king knight and a king and 2 moves per turn. (spoilers black will probably win).
While, again, I haven't read the entire thread, here is my recent discovery:
Black may have an area attack of a 5x5 square, but the White King will not be affected by it; only by the default 3x3. Since a Black King, regardless of its double attack, can still never be allowed to be adjacent to the White King by the end of its turn.
In fact, if one wants to see it the following way, White can be place adjacent to one of Black's King, due to Black's 2-move nature, in which moment Black must move its adjacent King by the end of his/her first move. The idea is that the verdict of King checking King would be determined upon Black's 2nd move, since he/she is still allowed to make one more move after the normal 1st; such which would give leway to White's King, because White is not technically in check with Black's King prior to Black's first move. At the start of the second move, adjacent Kings are an illegal position.
(However, White may not place his/her King on a square that is adjacent to both Black Kings; because both black Kings cannot be moved away by the end of the 1st black move, which means the 2nd King can attack White's King during the 2nd.)
This, of course, lead to my second discovery: this variant is a bogus game, because this means that White is checkmated upon a check.
If Black's Knight can threaten White's King during Black's first move, it can and will capture him during Black's 2nd move. There must be more than 8 times the regular number of positions for Black to do this than if all of Black's regular pieces are on the board and is only allowed to move once. (Don't quote me on the math; I could be wrong there.)
Unless, of course, we want to enforce a follow-rule that Black may not enter his/her Knight onto a square that would check White's King until it's 2nd move. (It may or may not harmoniously work with the previous rule of White being allowed to be placed adjacten to 1 of black's King and Black having to move that King away during his/her first move. Right now, I'm having logical overload thinking about this. I should let my mind clear, and then come back to build on it later.)
Note that black only has two pieces: a royal King and a non-royal Knight, both double-moving. The double-moving King is of course very much like a (royal) Chu-Shogi Lion, but a double-moving Knight is even far stronger. There is no overlap between its single and double moves, and less overlap between its double moves, so it attacks 40 squares instead of 24.
Note that the rules for moving through check with the double move are not clear.
While, again, I haven't read the entire thread, here is my recent discovery:
Black may have an area attack of a 5x5 square, but the White King will not be affected by it; only by the default 3x3. Since a Black King, regardless of its double attack, can still never be allowed to be adjacent to the White King by the end of its turn.
In fact, if one wants to see it the following way, White can be place adjacent to one of Black's King, due to Black's 2-move nature, in which moment Black must move its adjacent King by the end of his/her first move. The idea is that the verdict of King checking King would be determined upon Black's 2nd move, since he/she is still allowed to make one more move after the normal 1st; such which would give leway to White's King, because White is not technically in check with Black's King prior to Black's first move. At the start of the second move, adjacent Kings are an illegal position.
(However, White may not place his/her King on a square that is adjacent to both Black Kings; because both black Kings cannot be moved away by the end of the 1st black move, which means the 2nd King can attack White's King during the 2nd.)
This, of course, lead to my second discovery: this variant is a bogus game, because this means that White is checkmated upon a check.
...
Black only has one king.
Incorrect; the black king only has to be safe after the second move.
Right, he's in checkmate.
Incorrect again.
I don't see what I was "incorrect again" about. A Knight checking White's King on its first move has the option to move onto the threatened King's square for its second move, thereby capturing him; thereby checkmating White.
Unless there's an extra rule where Black's winning condition is not checkmate but to capture all of White's pieces, which I missed somewhere in the thread?
(While White can checkmate Black?)
That aside, it's what happens when you have information overload: seems that, amidst my grandiose (mis)analysis, I forgot the simple fact that Black could capture a King by being adjacent to White's.
Apart from the brain overload, I guess I was trying a bit too hard to be smart. xD
I also seemed to have misread the OP's post:
Black gets a king (and a) knight and a king and 2 moves per turn.
which made me misunderstood the OP stating that there are 2 Kings.
Yes, I made a similar mis-interpretation (thinking that 'king knight' meant a KN compound, i.e. a Centaur). But it was explained later in some of the posts above that he just meant a King-side Knight (i.e. on g1).
And in the first diagram you post here, Bf1-d3 was an illegal move: white is in check, and must resolve that. Interposing is never possible on Knight's checks, so he either has to capture the black Knight (which is not possible here), or move his King out of check (e.g. Ka1).
Ok. Well, that had to be clarified in the OP. I'm assuming it might have been somewhere in the long discussion that I haven't read yet, but my previous understanding was that there was no such modified rule of checking, which lead me to the conclusion that a Knight's otherwise check would be considered checkmate; I wasn't quite sure why I was "incorrect again", as stated legoPirate.
With this new knowledge, I say, the problem is that one can't always spot it when White is in Check, since people never had to, as a rule, see Knight moves 2 moves down the line; compound with the fact that it's simply frustrating how White's King is restricted: he can't move onto a square 2 knight moves in addition to the original check 1 knight move away.
Where then can he move? It's almost like playing against a piece with a 7x7 area attack. (That's the High Priestess's 5x5, plus 1 range!)
Indeed, a double-move Knight with 'Lion power' is an immensely poweful piece. And it does hit-and-run captures from a distance, along a step that almost no piece reciprocates.
That people have to think harder is not really a valid objection. This is supposed to be a difficult variant, and having them think harder is the entire objective.
Of course black's weakness is that he only has two pieces, so he can never afford to lose any of them. When white keeps his King out of range of checks from squares he does not attack, and keep all his pieces protected, he does not have to fear two-step captures. So he only has to worry about hit & run captures.
i've played this and it's possible to mate on your first move even if they go first
In which case, "Flying Knight" is....well, maybe not necessarily a fail... more like a disappointment. xD
But, needless to say: it was kind of sort of implied at the beginning, anyways.
Honestly, no one piece should have the power to eat up more than half of the board; which the Black Knight has.
(All the blue squares are where a Knight can check/checkmate a King.)
I would like to check these rules in reliable source.
If the black king can enter check in his first step or not is crucial for white's strategy and overall game balance.