Having recently downloaded ChessV (Chess Variants), and having become somewhat fascinated by some of these alternative modes of playing chess, I came to think about this site and the explosive development it has undergone lately, with vast monthly updates. Complementing the current selection (standard chess, Fischer random, 3+ and KotH), I'm wondering if, at some point in the future, implementations of variants such as Grand Chess, Capablanca chess or Shatranj could be of interest? I think these variants (well, variant and variant, chess is more like a development of Shatranj than anything) complement our beloved game very well, and can act as refreshing new perspectives (apart from being highly interesting games in their own right).
All the best / marcohallonen
Relevant:
http://en.lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/why-not-add-checkers-too?page=3#22In short, chess variants need to be PGN compliant, otherwise it's quite a lot of work.
Ah, makes a lot of sense. Guess I'll keep at it with the ChessV A.I then:)
Atomic is PGN compliant and requires no additional pieces.
If more variants are to be added, Atomic and Crazyhouse should definitely be the first ones since they are so popular.
But first of all, i think one should be allowed to create also rated games with the lichess board editor and it could also include some automatic positions (eg you could generate 960 positions with only one click, or you could choose to switch the pawn ranks; this would mean, you would be playing 'Upside-down chess' variant, etc.)
This way people could make their own variants (3-check 960 or KotH with the other playing having no pieces, no king... 'only' 32 pawns). People could actually play competitively which would promote playing variants... most people want to play rated games so i see no point why one shouldn't be allowed to play rated them, even with some 'adjustments'. The games created with the board editor could be counted as distinct 'variations points'. This means, a player could have 4 variation ratings: 3-check, KotH, 'variations', and a 3rd 'real' variation eg Atomic.
The games generated with the board editor shouldn't ofc be taken to the front page game-list and should be allowed to play by only sending and clicking a link. (It would be impossible to tell on the front page that you're going to play 3-check 960 instead of regular 960.)
I played only two or three times in my life two vars that are 100% PGN supported. Easy to say that I don`t like them, as I never wanted to play them again. But anyway:
One I know as "Marseilleuse", where you make two moves at a time, and check or mate can only be the second move and you have to get out of check on first move. So, 100% normal rules.
Another one: "No", where after each move you say a move (or make it on the board, and your opponent will see it highlighted) that your opponent *can`t* do. When there`s only one legal move, ignore the rule.
Only thing interesting about these two vars is that there`s nothing to learn. Marseilleuse is top violent, games don`t take more than about 10 moves usually, I knew a guy who played it a lot in a club. And "No" is pretty much irritating, and it`s not just my opinion, I never knew anyone that liked it or even played more than one or two games of this var. But who knows?
There is a way how to show pieces randomly showing up on the board in crazyhouse. You can just put @ before the move. For example, a white knight showing up at e4 would be like "WN@e4"
""WN@e4"" is not supported by pgn i think, i used to play that on babaschess interface on FICS and it is fun but you have to have some client or java applet to function that thing.
<Comment deleted by user>
"No" can be played both otb and here without any change. Just set an unrated game (of course it has to be unrated) and type in the dialog box the move that your opponent can`t do. My suggestion is at least a 10 30 time control, if you want the game to make some sense.