Hrqls: Without c2-c3 will the White presumably lose. -- To be honest, I think the game is by far not as good as it seems.

Who is Stevie2? Is the same Stevie? Why do you call racist to Bad Bishop?

Well, if it´s Stevie, this explains everything...

Stevie, are u cheating us?

hey vnv, it can't be. i played many times with stevie and he is a nice guy. i didn't liked the remark that Bishop made about me this afternoon, but i think it wasn't racism...

nope, stevie2 is a portuguese player, they were Eiur before

Obrigado Nuno :o)

I think thats the right word and spelling?

does anyone else have an opinion about white not being allowed to start with c2-c3 ?

Welcome, Stevie.
yes, it's the right word. :o)

Hrqls: I have an opinion about that. I'm against changing the rules in every game, just because some players don't like it. The creator of the game, made the rules, some other guy create others, so what i propose is one of 2 choices. return to the original rules or create 2 alquerque game types (one with Alfonso rules and the other stays like it is now).

NM: I agree that two variants, "Bell's Alquerque" and "Alfonso's Alquerque", would be probably the best solution. The question is whether Fencer agrees too... :-)

i didnt imply the rules of the current would have to change .. i dont even imply a variant with different rules would have to introduced .. i was just asking about the effect of that restriction :)

there are too many things on fencers plate already ... so lets talk about it first ;)

I dont see Fencer setting up two versions of the same game. But either restricting the c2-c3 opening move or somehow adding something like a dice roll to see which color would start the game is an option. Similir to backgammon where the dice decide the color. It wouldn't prevent the c2-c3 opening but would cut down on people padding their ratings by only playing one color.

Nightstorm: this could be very unfair. Imagine a tournament where each player plays both sides. And in both games looses the dice roll... I don´t think this is the solution, nor even the two different versions of the game. But what we need is ideas, like the last posts you, Hrqls, Nuno Miguel, Bad Bishop, etc., are sending, and together we will be able to find a good solution for this game...

I still think this is one of the best games of BK...

It would seem that in order to make this a better game a new variation of it might be in order. With enough input from players of the game it might be possible. What about playing with 11 pieces instead of 12? Remove the b3 and d3 piece or something similer?

i discovered the c3 move by accident, which isn't hard, since there are only a few moves possible at the start of the game. Like Maharajah and Horde, if you play correctly, you will not lose with the right color. I don't believe you need to change the game, just realize it is akin to those other two. I won't play it any more after the team tourney, I don't think.

Yesterday I played several games following the Alfonso's rules with my chess partner and I'd say, they are much more equal and challenging then Bell's rules. I'd strongly suggest to either switch completely to them or at least really make two variants, "Bell's Alquerque" and "Alfonso's Alquerque".

I agree 100% with Bishop

Same here

makes sense...as it stands now, i'd never play another game of it anyway!!

redsales, how about if the rules changed would you play again ?

Finnaly I can see some mouvement about the game!
My opinion is Alfonso rules kill the game as Bell Rules do. Alfonso make the game tied infinitaly boring... Bell gave no chance to black.
My suggestion is to play with Bell rules, but just with 10 pieces, remove the 2 most advance pieces for both players.

Just a what-if. What if there was an extra blank row inserted in middle of the board between the 2 sides?

Don't know... Its difficult to see and test it... The empty row will have what links? I think black could (depending of the links) start the game with one piece less with just the first white move. In that assumption they will be better than actually...

http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=509386

shouldn't I be able to jump over the white piece now? or am i reading the rules wrong. Piece on last row can't move except horizontal jump?

Piece on last row can't move except horizontal jump is correct.
Piece on last row can jump backwards too, but only in a multiple jump where the first capture must be horizontal.

hmm so i could move in that example if it were a multi jump?

I don't know exactly which move (number) are we talking about. I tried to explain how I understand the rules.

Let's say, that there is

(a) a black piece on c1, white on c2 and nothing on c3 = black can't jump, because he can't move backward at the beginnig of his move...

(b) a black piece on a1, white pieces on b1 and c2, and c1 and c3 are empty = black can/must jump from a1 to c1 and because he's already moving, he must jump further to c3.

ok, got it! thanks BB!

Fencer, if we can come to a consensus on a way to make this game better, would you consider changing it, or does it stand the way it is?

Mmmmm, Bell's and Alfonso's variant sounds reasonable.

Great, I think thats what the majority of players want.

If i can suggest one thing Fencer don't implement those variants... One has the problem of making impossible the task of one coulor the other if one player wants to stuck the game, the game could last forever, and the win will become for tireness not for strategy...
I know i'm not the majority of the players and I'm just a pawn but please reconsider, now you have one game that nobody (in his sense) wants to play don't transform in 2 variants that no one wants to play it ...
just my 2 cents of course...

I think, that even with the present rules there is still the possibility to draw if both players are equal in pieces and none of them want to attack (or to make a senseless attack). If one of the players has an advantage in material after the middle game, he should IMHO win. It means: There would be probably more draws with the Alfonso's rules. There is a lot of draws in chess or checkers - so what? Playes who can't or don't want to see a draw and want to play forever to make their opponent tired are not worth playing with. :-)

If these have been mentioned, let me know.

Reza likes the idea of backward captures.

Sunfire and I talked about playing it on a 6x6 board.

The game is meaningless as it stands now.

Fencer, would it be possible if the Alquerque game boards were shrunk down to add double Alquerque here?

http://www.zillions-of-games.com/cgi-bin/zilligames/submissions.cgi/92230?do=show;id=318

He plans on shrinking them eventually. I hope it is soon, because it is such a pain to play the game having to scroll up and down to see the whole board..

Is there any progress in changing alquerque rules?

This game is beeing less and less played, and sooner, if rules will not be changed, no one will play it...

For me, the size of the graphics keeps me from playing it much now.. Takes WAY too long to load on webtv, and I hate scrolling back and forth to see the whole thing, to decide on my move..

So, I'm wondering what the progress is on making the graphics smaller?

Come on Fencer, you don't have much to do! LOL...

Hello

We are currently looking for a new moderator of this board. Are you interested?

More Information: Check out the Members only board

To Apply: Just Send me a Message

PLEASE do not post if here since I may miss it, just send me a message. Also feel free to send me a message with any questions.

rod03801: same here i tend not to play it because the graphics are too big, the same with Jarmo which is a shame cos i like that game.

furbster: not that I know anything.... but have you asked Fencer to change what you say?

Fencer plans on shrinking both the Jarmo and Alquerque boards at some point. At least that's what he said after the games were first added.

rod03801: well, since he did his recent re-shuffle..... I would assume that this board and Jarmo are here to stay for a while - I certainly dont know any different.....

Huh?? we are talking about the size of the game boards... not discussion boards..

rod03801: sorry Rod, misread the convo.

lol.. you're allowed..

Up until now I've only ever played tablut on here. The addition of alquerque piqued my interest, but unfortunately the forward-only movement rule put me off--I might as well play draughts (or checkers, to those of you who prefer American English).

Now I've got a real alquerque board to play on, so I've got interested in the game again. I will, however, wait patiently until the time when Fencer creates an Alfonso variant, before I join in. I say patiently, as I've already mentioned elsewhere the possibility of more tafl variants to complement tablut :-)

Is this game a draw? http://brainking.com/game/ShowGame?g=1010421

of course not...

Well, the MATCH will be a draw...

Ok, then how does he beat me? He can't move backwards.