Liste des forums de discussions
Vous n'êtes pas autorisé de poster des messages dans ce forum. Le niveau d'adhésion minimal requis pour poster dans ce forum est Pion.
Yeah, that was rather underwhelming, but I suppose I'll go ahead and post the rest just in the case a Checker Variant enthusiast might give the game a try and have some questions about the play. ========= ========= ========= ========= ======= =========
A King is a lot stronger than a Man. A Man just has two movement places compared to a King's six. A Man can be blocked just by putting any piece in front of it though such a blocked Man can jump over the blocking piece if it can make a capture or split jump. A Man can only capture by jumping over any piece first, whereas a King can capture simply by moving sideways or jumping over any piece forwards or backwards and landing on an opponent's piece and a King can capture a King straight across too. A King early in the game can clear out the opponet's backrows very quickly by capturing moving sideways, so you have to prevent your opponent from getting a King unless you are able to get one yourself. A split jump can fight off a King as it can be split apart moving one of the Men sideways. This can keep a King away from the split jump or force the King next to the split jump and then to jump over the split jump to get past it safely. The Men can make split jumps and this can be a powerful set up. As the split jump is moved apart you can relay the Man forward and get behind the opponent's defense. A split jump is vulnerable to attack right next to it though and a good threat is to immediately jump one of your Men towards the split jump setting up the capture of the split jump on the next turn, thereby forcing your opponent to play out the split jump instead of letting him keep it there threatening you. When the game is nearing the all Kings stage you have to be carefull because when the last Man is off the board the Kings get the extra capturing move and this can be a lot of trouble if you haven't prepared for it. ======= ======== ==== =========== ========== =====
More added=====> Walter Montego: (1. November 2007, 00:04:12) No, a piece may jump over any piece to make a capture. The piece that is jumped over remains where it is. Kings can jump any piece and do not have to make a capture unless the jumping lands on a piece. Nothing happens if a Kings jumps a piece and lands on an unoccupied square. Men can only jump an opponent's piece if they make a capture or a split jump. Men MAY NOT jump an opponent's piece and land on an unoccupied square. Men can always jump over their own side's piece (King or Man) and land on an unoccupied square.
A split jump is a special move. Only the Men can make it, never a King or Kings. To do a split jump a Man must jump ANY piece of EITHER player and land on a Man of HIS side. The two Men occupy the square together. Yes, there's usually not room enough to accomodate them so you might lean one on the other or you can just have them side by side in the square overlapping into the unused colored squares, just don't stack them on top of each other as it'll look like a King and that is not what it is. If you're playing in a noisy enviroment or with someone that's not paying too close of attention to the game for some reason, you might also point out to your opponent that you just made a split jump. This can help prevent confusion or an argument from developing.
I'm not sure if I'm clear on the jumping. All jumps in Jump Checkers cover the same distance. The piece that's going to do the jumping must be right next to the piece that's going to be jumped. When the jump is complete, the piece that did the jumping is on the square immediately on the other side of the jumped piece. That's it. No roaming or flying Queens. It looks like a jump in regular Checkers except that the piece that is jumped over is never captured.
Men can capture in two ways. (1) By jumping ANY piece and landing on the opponent's piece in the immediate square after the jumped piece. (2) By moving off of a split jump. When one of the two Men that occupy a square in a split jump is moved it must go to one of three squares. Orthogonally sideways or forward straight across. If an opponent's piece occupies the square, it is captured. Kings capture in four ways. (1) They can jump any piece and land on an opponent's piece. (2) They can move orthogonally sideways and if the square is occupied by an opponent's piece, the piece is captured. (3) If an opponent's King is orthogonally straight ahead or behind the King, the King may move to capture the opponent's King by occupying that King's square. (4) At the stage of the game when the only pieces on the board are all Kings, a King may capture an opponent's King by moving diagonally two squares. (This move looks like a jump and landing on a King without a piece being jumped)
Captures are optional. No double jumps. In Jump Checkers you have to guard your pieces similar to how it is done in Chess. Trades are like that too. The not having to make a capture rule is one thing that makes Jump Checkers a lot different than most Checkers variants. Having two Men on one square is different too. And no double jumps is another. Kings are a lot stronger than Men, so make sure you don't let your opponent get a King unless you can get one yourself or have a defensive line that the King can't break up or else that King will eat up all your pieces in a few moves and the game will be over. When you have two Men in a split jump, you can control the three squares that one of the Men must move to when the split jump is broken up. A King can't easily fight against a split jump unless he can position a piece to jump onto the split jump. As I said earlier, one way to fight split jumps is to immediately jump a piece towards the square with the split jump's two Men on it. This threatens to capture the two Men in the split jump and it attacks it from the diagonal. The split jump Man leaves orthogonally. It'll take a few games of play to see how to use split jumps to your advantage and also how to thwart them. Though this may seem obvious, you should never make a split jump that is subject to immediate capture! You'll lose two Men and I can't imagine a position where that would be a favorable outcome.
Sujet: Re: Some Jump Checkers pointers from a letter
Walter Montego: Hi, Montego. INstead of a "jump checkers", I would rather see in brainking some important variants, played all over the world, with true championships, like Russian checkers, classic checkers, Italian checkers or International checkers. In my opinion, those should be "checkers priorities" here. But it doesn't mean I disagree with the introdution of jump checkers, of course. Just a question of priority!
Sujet: Re: Some Jump Checkers pointers from a letter
Gabriel Almeida: Why not have those games and Jump Checkers? Those games you mention are all just slight variations of the same game. Yes, that makes them different games, but not as much as the differences between Atomic, Extinction, Embassy, Loop, Dark, or Giveaway Chess variants. As for Jump Checkers, it truly is a different kind of Checkers. Play a couple of games and see for yourself.
You got me curious about the Checkers games that are on this site. That's a rather strange and incomplete list, I will agree with you there! It looks rather skewed towards Czech versions too, which I assume is the flying Queen/King rules. This might have something to do with where Fencer is from?
Just regular ol' Checkers has a few variants in the playing rules that I'm sure aren't available as choices here, either. I never play Checkers, but it is a challenging game. I sure wouldn't play the game online as it can now be played perfectly by machines and computer programs. Is there a Dark Checkers version? Would it be or is it as playable as Dark Chess is?
I'm still rooting for Jump Checkers. Maybe Fencer will never add it, but at least he knows of the game, and now you do too. He's added other obscure games here and I've seen him add games that were made up on the fly, like how Ambiguous Chess was added to the site. Jump Checkers may not be widely known or even played any more, but it isn't just some game out of the blue. Well, yes I guess it is! :) And if it does get added, I'll play it. And you'll get an invitation too.