Chess idea of 3/25-26

Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 1:24 AM

(By reading this e-mail, you consent NOT to patent or copyright any or
all part of these ideas or their derivate in any form at anywhere; and
you also consent that the penalty of violation is any patent,
copyright obtained this way will AUTOMATICALLY transfer to me on the
expense of violator.)

1. A SUPER-SIMPLE yet fun concept for chess. It is called
complement-6. The rule are stupid: Make a total of six whatever you
move. Number as unit in the game broad, dice as pawn. You need to roll
in order to move. This concept is the movement module, and could
combine with other rule module to produce a new game.

Follow up on my last idea of the concept a chess game without
starting and destination.
2. One practical implementation is a game broad make of squares of
five color, which is changeable. Now any number of player could put
their pawn there, move to satisfy criteria like have much of one/two
color as possible, ranked the color, add the number up. Or the
criteria change every time a player move, like this move a player has
to move across three red. (The concept of Changing criteria is central
to Euler’s Relationship chess and Euler’s Logical Chess)

3.

4. New ways to play flying aircraft chess: A. Originally each player
has four aircraft in their base, now imagine each player’s aircraft is
distributed in all base; B. Instead of starting from the base, we
could reverse the role of destination and base. C. Add ranking into
consideration, we could have two set of independent rule modules: C1:
The higher in rank could eliminate the lower in rank, not vice versa;
C2: The higher in rank could block movement of lower in rank, not vice
versa.

5. A new concept could be implement in all of my inventions except
Wall Street Chess(Only one pawn per player): Ranks. But we have to
either increase the number of pawn or decrease the number of player.
In the simplest case, we can imagine two person play against each
other with seven dices as their pawn, ranked from highest to lowest.
Start in any location as they like, and only those rank the higher
could eliminate lower. Or in circular fashion, these no highest and
lowest; or in a fixed difference fashion which a certain level of
difference is the criteria for elimination.

6. A concept from Big-2 in card game could also be implemented in
Euler’s Dice or any game that use changeable numbers which one from
the player and another from the game broad like 1. The idea is rather
simple: Use the sum of these two number as an temporary attribute, and
this attribute is governing whether the next player could make a move
or not. It could be the next must be higher than the last one in order
to move, or any of the six relationship (>=,=,<=,<,!=). And that
relationship could be changed from turn to turn or round to round
through consent or random process like throwing a dice. Once it reach
the place where no player could move by satisfying that criteria, it
is the last player who call the shoot and restart the whole process
again. Euler’s Relationship Chess is an obvious candidate for that.

7. A rather pointless variant of 6: Reverse rule module which the
player have to do anything to PREVENT the result from satisfy that
relationship.

8. An implementation for a previous concept of player changing the
attribute of the location they occupied. The inherent problem is that
the number of player must be equal to total number of variant of that
feature in the game broad. (Or some sort of special treatment in case
of later greater than former, not the converse) The new concept is
that attribute changed by a player’s action would immediately affect
other player’s action. One example would prohibiting other player from
landing on a location which share the attribute which player could
change. For instance, in the case of flying aircraft chess, it would
be once a player landed on red, all red square is prohibited from
other player. In the case of 2, once a player landed on a yellow
square, all other player are prohibited from ROUTING through there/
landing as the final destination.

9. Elimination Rule Module: Any pawn land on a square with an
attribute that is identical or satisfy a specific relationship(fixed
or changeable, provided or made up or randomized) to a square already
landed by a pawn from other player would either be eliminated or
eliminating the other. i.e. landed on a square with 6 kill all other
player’s pawn landed on 6. Alternatively, a player landed on 5 and
kill all other player landed on a square with the properties >=5.

10. An variant of 9: Weakening instead of elimination. There’s an
attribute of player’s pawn called life, and its affected through Rule
Module like 6. Once it reach zero, a player’s pawn is dead. This
concept is widely applied in card-fight-game, not heard of in chess.

11. An variant of 10: Instead from 100 to 0, we can divide the
effect of 6 to different states of a pawn, and each state has
different set of CAN or CAN’T. It could be corresponding to a number
system like 7() or without a numerical system.

12. I heard of somebody has invented something call five element
chess, but I never know the details. My thoughts on this would be:
Instead of each person classify as one element, each person could be
classify as a composite of five element, so do each event. And each
element is interacting with the element from other terms of equation
in different way. Moreover, taken into account Chinese astrology
contain much more than a single element, we may need to consider
things like the dominate animal of the day, that is one person’s luck
is a composite of more than one luck element. Could this be implement
as a chess? Yes, we only need more set of rule for the other element.
Add them up we get the player’s most accurate state of being. BTW,
through this I just discover the concept of parallel rule module: we
could allow more than one rule act on player independent of each
other, the net result is sum of all the effect from each rule.

12. A variant of 9 is that instead of sum, we could utilize a more
complicated operation. And the operation could either be decide by
drawing a card(one of them or each of them draw part of it), or a
random process like each throw a dice of symbol or a dice of number
with an (non-)adjustable translation table.

13. Rule Module interaction: The effect on player’s action in one area
govern by one independent rule module affect another independent rule
module, which in turn affect the player himself(or other). We can
deconstruct a game into: Request(from the randomizer), Respond(The
action of player) and Rules. Then we could conceive of a concept that
how a player responding to a request affect his/her next request,
request of other in long/short/variable term.

14. +,-,*,/ as the unit of a chess construct in a similar way as
Euler’s Logical Chess. Remember the result of positive times negative/
negative times positive/ positive times positive? Well, it maybe too
simple.

15. Cross turn chess game. This idea could implement in this way: Use
chess broad unit, player could move to a square with a specific
number, then the first/coming player throw a dice for mathematic
operation, which the next/third player throw yet another dice which
satisfy the goal of forming an valid mathematical expression like
3+4-2<3. Notice the difference between this and 6 is that each player
provide an attribute but not through a randomizer.

16. Elevator Chess concept: Suppose there are n floors and m elevators
which the later is the ONLY means to travel through the floors.
However, these elevator either only go to specific floor or a specific
range of floor or a number of floor satisfy some sort of numerical
relationship. Now your task is to went through all the floor before
other, is that possible? Or your task is to make up the rules so other
is difficult, but not impossible to reach all the floor? How about if
it is made to some sort of strategy game between two player which one
make up the rule, and another try to reach all of the floors?

17. How about 14 applied in more than one dimension? There are two way
to view it. One is to see it as a way to de-construct a maze, another
is applied it as a chess game played by two player(as x,y coordinate).
Of course, 3 player as partner is possible in a cube game.

1 則回應給 Chess idea of 3/25-26

  1. chinese inventions 說道:

    […] form at anywhere and you also consent that the penalty of violation is any patent, copyright obtainhttps://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/chess-idea-of-325-26/In a galaxy not so far, far away Sydney Morning HeraldHere are some exciting inventions that could […]

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: