Queening not fair

Sort:
Avatar of rizmag

 Hmm you look like a cheater. 

And a troll obviously

Avatar of gambitattax

Troll thread

Avatar of jonesmikechess

Let's add a rule to help the spread of disease:  my opponent isn't allowed to touch my pieces.

Avatar of macer75
jonesmikechess wrote:

Let's add a rule to help the spread of disease:  my opponent isn't allowed to touch my pieces.

What happens when your opponents captures a piece?

Or, better yet - what happens if you're playing bughouse?

Avatar of MayCaesar
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of IDASP

Don't feed the troll, it means they win.

Avatar of IDASP

Don't feed the troll, it means they win.

Avatar of chesssky2

If i did feed him what would i feed him? Applesauce? Magno yam purée?

Avatar of gungangineer

I came into this very active and still relevant to say:  Queening makes no sense, but I still think knighting should be allowed.  Knights are useless anyway.  I mean, they can't even capture things that are right next to them.  Also, knights shouldn't be able to jump over pieces because that makes them way too powerful.  This is an internally consistent stance.

Avatar of brianchesscake

On a serious note, I do think that getting an automatic queen after promoting a pawn is unfair. I think a player should only be able to promote to a piece that he or she already lost in the game, meaning that one player can't have more than one queen on the board. Having two queens is severely over-powered.