Is there loseres chess here? If there isnt, why not to include losers chess wich is a very popular chess variant? It is important to note that is a different variant than antichess (or suicide). In losers chess there is check. So you win when you got checkmated or stalemated or when you lose all your pieces, (but you cannot lose your king, because it ckant be taked.) See rules and some tactic ideas here: http://wiki.wildchess.org/wiki/index.php/Losers

pedestrian: you can also play Makruk on ThaiBG (Thai Board Games Online), along with the three other "big" chess variants and a couple of other games

pedestrian: Ok, update: I found this site where you can create an account and play:
http://www.playok.com/en/makruk/

I played a couple of quick games. It works this way: When all pawns are gone or promoted, you're presented with the option to start counting (I don't know if this applies to both players. I was behind in material). When one player is down to a bare king, the counting starts over - but this time it's automated.

Fencer: The way I read the rules, yes. Keep in mind that I don't know this game any better that you do, though. I'm just trying to make sense of it, same as you.

pedestrian: That's a good idea. Is it correct that counting can start only when there are no pawns left?

Fencer: The point of counting is to obtain a draw. Counting is voluntary. Stopping to count is voluntary too (in case you change your mind and don't want a draw anymore). This much seems to be clear.

Couldn't you simply interpret the rules like this: Whoever starts counting, thinks he's at a disadvantage. That means that theoretically, both players could count if they wanted to - but they would probably both be happy with a draw in this case!

I see your point. Take a look on facebook group. There are a bunch of kids playing it. There must not be so difficult.

Ukimix: You know, the more the rules are complicated, the less people actually play the game. I must think it over and decide if it is worth my time do implement all these counting rules and be prepared for a lot of bugs that will probably appear later.

Fencer:

"one player has less pieces (ergo, the disadvantage), then manages to capture some opponent's pieces and turn the advantage to own side, etc."

The counting begins again, in that case.

Fencer:

Yes, good idea. I think that there is some groups in facebook that could help.

I found this site to play on line: http://www.pathguy.com/chess/ThaiChss.htm. We can use it to figure it out.

Ukimix: I sense problems here because of the disadvantage condition. I can be kind of variable, e.g. one player has less pieces (ergo, the disadvantage), then manages to capture some opponent's pieces and turn the advantage to own side, etc.

It would be nice if some Thai players give us an enlightenment on this.

Fencer:

The site says:

"Drawn Games:

Many games of makruk end in draws, and this is because of special rules in the endgame which permit the disadvantaged player to claim a draw in very peculiar, and sometimes rather complex, ways. "

This means that those special rules apply only when a player is in disadvantadge condition. If there is not such a player, the rules doesnt apply. That is what I interpret, tought I have never played. Better to verify it.

Fencer:

I was wondering about it. I wil try to find info.

Ukimix: What if both players have the same pieces when the last pawn is captured?

Fencer:

Accourding to: http://ancientchess.com/page/play-makruk.htm, the disadvantaged player is the player with the less powerfull group of pieces. Take a look on the site, it could help.

Ukimix: Very well, so how is it really used? For instance: "When neither side has any pawns left, mate must be achieved in 64 moves. The disadvantaged player does the counting."

How do you determine the disadvantaged player?

Fencer:

Yes, I was about to tell you about wikipedia, that explains it. :-)

Ah-ha! Wikipedia is our friend. That's what it says:

When neither side has any pawns, the game must be completed within a certain number of moves or it is declared a draw. When a piece is captured the count starts again from scratch only if it is the last piece of one side in the game.

* When neither side has any pawns left, mate must be achieved in 64 moves. The disadvantaged player does the counting, and may at any time choose to stop counting. If the disadvantaged side checkmates the advantage side and did not stop counting, the game is declared a draw.

When the last piece (that is not the King) of the disadvantaged side is captured, the count may be started, or restarted from the aforementioned counting, by the weaker side, and the stronger side now has a maximum number of moves based on the pieces left:

* If there are two rooks left: 8 moves
* If there is one rook left: 16 moves
* If there are no rooks left, but there are two bishops: 22 moves
* If there are no rooks left, but there is one bishop: 44 moves
* If there are no rooks or bishops left, but there are two knights: 32 moves
* If there are no rooks or bishops left, but there is one knight: 64 moves
* If there are no rooks, bishops, or knights, but queens: 64 moves

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makruk

Ukimix: Ah, there seems to be a problem:

"Object of the game is to mate the opponents king. Stalemate is a draw. Also, when a player has no rook, bishop, or knight anymore, the other player must mate him within a certain number of moves, depending on how many `big' pieces the player has, otherwise the game is declared a draw. The precise numbers are omitted here (also, my sources on this seem to contradict - is there a native player of this game who can provide full information on this topic?). "

The rules at Chessvariants are not certain about this subject. Would you have any other source of reliable information?

Ukimix: I was thinking of than, along with Changgi (Korean Chess). Actually, I didn't want to release new games until BrainKing 3.0 is completed, but since Makruk seems to be easy to implement (and, unlike Changgi, does not require any new images of pieces), I can try to spend some time on it, heh. No promises, though.

What about Makruk or Thai Chess? It would be really nice to add it to BK, since we have already shogi (japanese chess), and xianqi (chinese chess), not to speak about go.

World Champion Vladimir Kramnik says about this variant: "Makruk Thai is more strategic than International Chess, [...] You have to plan your operations with total care since Makruk Thai can be compared to an anticipated endgame of International Chess."

Take a look of Kramnik playing makruk here:
http://www.chessvariants.org/oriental.dir/thaikramnik.html

AbigailII: It might add a lot being on a smaller board than those other games. The name lags in my opinion, but the game might be a good game. Lots of concentrated power and yet still a Chess game.

echec-et-mat: How much would TUTTI-FRUTTI chess add, given that BK already has Embassy chess, Grand Chess and Capablanca Random Chess which all three feature the same "new" pieces TUTTI-FRUTTI features, although with a different name. And one of the pieces also appears as a Janus in Janus Chess.

Yes. It is very similar. Do u think we could play a little test tourney here in BK?

agentofchaos: Hmmm, the rules say "The rules of Neutral King Chess are identical to those of International Chess, except when noted below.", and below it doesn't mention anything about pawns. Yet, in the initial configuration, each player has exactly one pawn on their second row, and one pawn on their first row. Which means the white player can play 'd2-d4' twice. But not as a first move. And as a second move for the pawn starting from the first row. It would have made more sense to limit the pawn movement and forbid a double step as the move from the second row.

And the unsymmetric starting position irks me.

(BTW, if Fencer is going to make new games, I'd prefer to see some Mancala variants instead of yet another chess variant.)

Ukimix: Ukimix: Actually, there is a variant called Nuclear chess aka Dead Square Chess that has identical rules to your proposed variant. Here is a link:
http://www.chessvariants.org/difftaking.dir/deadsquare.html

OLTI27: This does sound like an interesting variant. There is another variant called Cursed Chess, which is somewhat similar, although not exactly the same. When a piece is captured it curses the square it is on so that enemy pieces are unable to cross it once the capturing piece leaves. Friendly pieces can still use the square though. The full description is here:
http://www.chessvariants.org/difftaking.dir/cursed.html

Here's an interesting variant by the inventor of Racing Kings (Vernon Parton). The rules are described here:
http://www.chessvariants.org/winning.dir/neutral-king.html
Basically, neither player has a king of their own, but there is a neutral king that may be moved by either player. The object of the game is to checkmate the Neutral King and prevent your opponent from doing so. I don't think there are ANY websites that have it! (Although there is a java applet at pathguy.com where you can play against a computer. But there's nowhere you can play against real opponents.) Brainking could have a world first!

Hello,
I have thought about a new chess variant: "DOUBLE KING CHESS". It is played on a board 12x10.The pieces (letter from a to j) are so collocated:Rook, Horse, Bishop, chancellor, Queen, King, Amazon, Marshall, Big King (a Bigger King that can move even two squares in every direction with possible jump), Bishop, Horse, Rook. No en passant rule. Castling is allowed like standard chess. Big King can not be checkmated. If Big King reach the last row the colour that obtain it win the game. A pawn can promote even on 8t row.
Thanks in advance for attention.
Cheers.

Sounds interesting! I would take part in. But please no time control under 5 days with standard vacation if possible. :)

I´d try to ask FromHell ;-)

No answer from caissus < :-(

Well! We are ready: a tourney with OLTI, Egzot, Staigi and me. :-) Hope it would be possible.

I asked Staigi, he likes it and can play

I wrote Caissus, to see if it is possible.

I am ready too

Ukimix: For me it's fine.

Maybe we can play a test tourney. We could play it with four players, to see what opinions result. OLTI27 could played, maybe Egzot, and me (shame that nabla cant play it). We would need another one.

Ukimix: Well all I can say is that your variant deserves to be playtested ! My advice would be to start some unrated Atomic games here with players who are ready to play by those rules. It shouldn't be long to see whether the variant works well or not.
Unfortunately I can't be one of those players (at least not for now), I need a lot of IRL time right now.

Ukimix:
It will be very interesting to se how tha game evalve this way. Probably it will give to the game more strategy without losing the taktik and dynamicity that makes atomic chess so fun. I think to give it a try and test play it.

I would like to propose to add a new chess variant to the site. It is quite easy and it is really fun. I call it: "Atomic-x" or "Atomix".

You know, atomic is an explosive variant, cause, taking a piece is like let down a small bomb in the square whre the piece is taken: every piece one square arround disappears (with the exception for pawns).

Well Atomic-X chess is even a more explosive game. It is played with the same rules than Atomic Chess, but with this two additional rules:
1. when a piece is captured, not only disappear the pieces around the taken piece, but also the square in wich one the piece were taken. So, nobody can locate a piece in that square from now on.
2. Once a square has disappear (by some capture on it) no attacks are allowed trougth that square, neither a piece can pass trougth that square; i.e. if white takes Nc8, it will be impossible for black to do long castle (o-o-o), since rock can pass trougth c8 square.

That is all!

I think about this variant cause i used to play atomic chess. Atomic players can find it interesting, i guess.

What do u think about adding this new variant? :-)

Ukimix

so you guys think we can get ultima on here?...

Sir, You are kind to let me and others
have a go at this. Checkmating the
knight is easier than you think if
you can get bishops or the queen
to place pressure on the knight

dicepro: You can try it, I've just added this game to BrainKing.

Servant: Interesting ... but how to check mate such a jumper ?

My Proposal is Knightmate Chess:

It is the same as standard chess but the knights and kings swap places, meaning you start with two kings where the knights are and one knight where the king is. Castling is permitted with the knight and en passant is still available. A pawn can promote to a king but not a knight. Just like the king, a knight cannot move into check, and it must move out of check on the very next move. All other rules are the same as standard chess.
An intriguing game full of suprise moves!

Would anyone like to play Modern Chess? It's Chess on a 9x9 board with an extra Prime Minister (or Minister/Archbishop = B + N) and a 9th pawn. It looks like fun.

http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game%3DModern+Chess%26settings%3DModern+Chess


While in the original setup both Bishops start up in the dark squares, there is a "Bishop-Castling" rule in this game which allows a player to swap places for one (and only one) of the Bishops with the adjacent Knight, Queen or Minister, therefore ending up with a Bishop on the light squares, just like in normal chess. The Bishop castling is optional though, and if one feels that playing with both Bishops on the dark squares is better, they can do so.

If you are interested, send me a PM.

On the way to work today i came up with the idea for a "Tafl Chess" variant - basically the pieces have the same moves as in regular chess but capture is by flanking (like in Tablut) rather than substitution as in normal chess. I played a game out when I got home and it seems to work - any thoughts?