it looks confusing...
laser cut chess set
Sort:
and boring...
Jun 7, 2013
0
#4
The idea is that the pieces depict their own moves. This set would be good for children. I prefer the Staunton design myself.
Definitely unique. Would be good for someone learning with the direction pointy thingy things.
DrFrank124c wrote:
The idea is that the pieces depict their own moves. This set would be good for children. I prefer the Staunton design myself.
oic! I didin't realize it until you pointed it out.
Jun 7, 2013
0
#7
Is this your own design? If not does the set have a name? If a set like that were made of rubber it would be great for kids to learn on. I checked out the Zing 16, the cheapest one is $9000.00 so thats one expensive chess set.
Yeah, I designed/made it. Doesn't really have a name.
The zing 16 is an investment. Will have it paid off in a few more years.
I'm kind of done with the Staunton sets. I can do that. I'm an adult. lol.
When you think about it, the Staunton sets are pretty non-informative. They just end up looking like wee statues. These geometric pieces serve as a constant (subconscious) reminder of how the pieces move, so that's why I developed them.
Most players will probably stick with the staunton sets though.
"You cheated!"
"Did not!"
"Did too - you just spun that Bishop and made it a Rook! I saw you!"
"Oh yeah? Well, I saw you spin your pawn and start moving it in the other direction!"
Except the Pawn looks like it moves up 1 and over 1.
The Knight looks like it moves 1 in any direction and then 1 at a 90 degree.
The King looks like it doesn't move at all.
And what if the Rooks or the Bishops get turned 45 degress in their square. Now it moves in the wrong direction.
Since these are so different from normal pieces (yes, a Staunton set) they would need to re-learn, wouldn't they?
"Hey, how come the pieces look like that? Thats not what MY set looks like."
BhomasTrown wrote:
Yeah, I designed/made it. Doesn't really have a name.
The zing 16 is an investment. Will have it paid off in a few more years.
I'm kind of done with the Staunton sets. I can do that. I'm an adult. lol.
When you think about it, the Staunton sets are pretty non-informative. They just end up looking like wee statues. These geometric pieces serve as a constant (subconscious) reminder of how the pieces move, so that's why I developed them.
Most players will probably stick with the staunton sets though.
The staunton set is genius because the pieces are easy to handle and they look pretty much the same from any viewing angle (with minor exceptions : the Knight, the bishop's notch, the king's cross and the notches in the top of some Rooks).
After move 11. B-K3 (Fischer-Bolbochan 1962 1-0)
BigDoggProblem wrote:
"You cheated!"
"Did not!"
"Did too - you just spun that Bishop and made it a Rook! I saw you!"
"Oh yeah? Well, I saw you spin your pawn and start moving it in the other direction!"
lol good one
BhomasTrown wrote:
Yeah, I designed/made it. Doesn't really have a name.
The zing 16 is an investment. Will have it paid off in a few more years.
I'm kind of done with the Staunton sets. I can do that. I'm an adult. lol.
When you think about it, the Staunton sets are pretty non-informative. They just end up looking like wee statues. These geometric pieces serve as a constant (subconscious) reminder of how the pieces move, so that's why I developed them.
Most players will probably stick with the staunton sets though.
This set looks pretty cool:
Probably wouldn't want to play with it though. Takes a second to realize what the pieces are, ao that sorta interferes with board recognition.
the real pieces are inside of us haha.
Made with Corel Draw, and Zing 16 laser from Epilog.