LXIVC -IvanKosintsev
40. Sb5:c5 Gf6-e5
41. Gh2-f4 Cc10-a8
Waterloo
Sort:
42. Kh1-g3
I'll resign soon
Happy Christmas!
How many drinks should I take to understand your nonsense 42. Kh1-g3 ?
Dec 25, 2016
0
#305
Merry Christmas to you too, Ivan. =)
But hey, come now. Let's not think "nonsense". That's really not the holiday spirit.
I'm sure he meant g2. (Or h2? O.o)
It was g2, of course. I'll just resign now. Thanks for the game. I will try it again sometime.
Dec 26, 2016
0
#307
42 moves. You got further than I did; and performed a whole lot better.
Thank you LXIVC & BC for the company. Now everyone knows how to play Waterloo and anybody can play without our assistance. I'm happy. Good Luck!
Salute to LXIVC and IvanKosintsev for finishing a game of Waterloo! (looks like a complex and experimental type of chess). Will either of the players let us know what you thought of the game? Was there a good range of power among the pieces?
Also is there any significance in the starting position of the queen and king? I noticed that contrary to normal chess, the white queen is on right-side of the king. And the white/black KQ are diagonally-symmetric, rather than mirror-symmetric (usual in classical chess). Is there any significance to this?
I'd be really interested to learn of any thoughts or insights about this game. Great play!
Alien Chess
Personally, I feel comfortable, and this is the main. All parameters of pieces does not matter
There are several arguments in favor of the diagonally-symmetric chess:
1. Etiquette.
2. East chess (Thailand)
3. The uncompromised game in style of old masters (Alechin) without a draw stupidity.
4. The human nature (anatomy).
5. Psychology of an equality.
Dec 27, 2016
0
#313
IvanKosintsev wrote:
Thank you LXIVC & BC for the company. Now everyone knows how to play Waterloo and anybody can play without our assistance. I'm happy. Good Luck!
lol NOW, IvanK,
Considering that I considered your variant and played a game with you, you do realize that you have yet to return the favor, do you not? Remember my variant with a lot of memorization to do?
If I gave you some excercizes over 3 weeks for you to get yourself familiar with the pieces...will you be willing to play a game of it with me?
I've gotten rid of the wizard, because he was an excess piece. Per LXIVC's suggestion, I made "special powers" more consistent and added one for each of the major/moderate/minor pieces, not just the Pheonix.
Here is something to think about: you are a much higher-rated player in chess than I am. I'm sure you would beat the stuffing out of me in my own variant. How awesome would that be for you? 
IvanKosintsev wrote:
There are several arguments in favor of the diagonally-symmetric chess:
...
4. The human nature (anatomy).
...
Humans are closer to having mirror symmetry, like this:
101
202
303
(symmetry on vertical axis)
Classical chess has mirror symmetry like this:
aQKb
....
aQKb
....
aQKb
(symmetry on horizontal axis)
Waterloo has mostly mirror symmetry but the KQ only have diagonal symmetry:
(general):
.123
1.12
21.1
321.
1.12
21.1
321.
(symmetric along diagonal axis)
Or KQ in Waterloo:
aQKb
....
aKQb
aQKb
....
aKQb
The kings don't face each other; rather they face their opponent's queen. I'm still trying to think if this has any consequences. I hope to play a game of Waterloo soon, but would like to understand this first. (Or maybe it doesn't matter so much???).
My intuitive view on the human nature (anatomy) through a chess prism is such:
the weak King is a Heart of army, the Bishops and the Rooks are hands and legs, the Queen - an inner strength.
Do you agree or not?
Dec 27, 2016
0
#316
Not that I have relevance in your and Vickalan's string of conversation here, but Ivan, is there a reason why you're deliberately skipping over my post and ignoring me? =)
I'm an open person for all: aristocracy, plebs, governor, rebels, police, mafia of all nations, robots and computers. But I'm open only if they like chess more then own political ambitions, if they talk clear and sincere.
I don't understand what you want?
Where is a diagram of your new 12x12 chess? Why you talk about it there? You have own topic for such chess.
You bring a confusion to amateurs of Waterloo.
IvanKosintsev wrote:
...the weak King is a Heart of army, the Bishops and the Rooks are hands and legs, the Queen - an inner strength.
OK, I agree! Now I'm getting ready to play a game of Waterloo. (You're the champ so I can challenge you?) But I have a few questions and suggestions:
1) We need to clarify the rules of castling.
2) (Here) you recently said classical king is better. So the king will only move by N(1) mode?
3) Can we use name "archbishop"(Ar) instead of "cardinal"? (they move the same)
4) Can we use name "chancellor"(C) instead of "marshal"? (they move the same)
5) Can we use board image and icons as shown below instead of "4th edition"?
6) Is it OK if we place the QK in mirror-symmetry (as all the other pieces)?
7) Can we forget about the Fantom, Demon, and Wisemen? These pieces are only obtained by promotion, but it doesn't seem like the new piece is stronger than the original piece. For example an advisor (queen-like piece) moving to the 10th rank can become a wiseman, but a wiseman does not seem stronger than an advisor.
4) Can we use name "chancellor"(C) instead of "marshal"? (they move the same)
5) Can we use board image and icons as shown below instead of "4th edition"?
6) Is it OK if we place the QK in mirror-symmetry (as all the other pieces)?
7) Can we forget about the Fantom, Demon, and Wisemen? These pieces are only obtained by promotion, but it doesn't seem like the new piece is stronger than the original piece. For example an advisor (queen-like piece) moving to the 10th rank can become a wiseman, but a wiseman does not seem stronger than an advisor.
That's all for now. I don't mean to cause trouble or delays. I agree with you "King is a Heart of army." That's the reason why I want to make sure the King starts with proper etiquette, and that the army has the best rules to create a psychology of equality.
Please let me know what you think!
Be careful and not hurry vickalan!
I offer an open international championship
WATERLOO 2017
by knockout system with a free registration (01.01.2017 - 30.05.2017) and with a start 01.01.2017.
It's well that you wrote your massage to clarify rules, but you don't understand all correctly and your diagram is already history.
There are my answers:
1) We need to clarify the rules of castling.
All is simple: see game and diagrams above. The Double casting is already Waterloo tradition.
2) (Here) you recently said classical king is better. So the king will only move by N(1) mode?
Yes! It's true.
3) Can we use name "archbishop"(Ar) instead of "cardinal"? (they move the same)
No! I like French culture (cinema and books). France was already teacher for my native country.
4) Can we use name "chancellor"(C) instead of "marshal"? (they move the same)
No!
5) Can we use board image and icons as shown below instead of "4th edition"?
At contemporary chess every player can use own diagrams. This is an international norm now.
6) Is it OK if we place the QK in mirror-symmetry (as all the other pieces)?
No!!! K - left, Q- right for everybody!
Q e10, K f10(blacks),
K e1, Q f1 (whites).
That's my ultimatum!
7) Can we forget about the Fantom, Demon, and Wisemen? These pieces are only obtained by promotion, but it doesn't seem like the new piece is stronger than the original piece. For example an advisor (queen-like piece) moving to the 10th rank can become a wiseman, but a wiseman does not seem stronger than an advisor.
F, D are dead, W is alive!
Please wait 5th edition!
41. Gh2-f4