3-Way Chess
Recently I've come across this fascinating version of chess. I've had an opportunity to play it and lost. Apparently I need more practice, but the concept itself is beautiful!
The regular chess rules are used, although the shape of the board is obviously different.
This is an empty board. Every player has 16 standard chess pieces.
This is the game that I've lost being inattentive.
The owner of the chessboard explains the rules. He bought his chessboard in Czech Republic.
The pawn moves as usual straight forward and takes enemy pieces one square diagonally forward.
In the center the pawn can attack three squares diagonally.
The bishop is limited to diagonal movement.
The rook moves as always. Nothing new.
The knight is also no different from a standard knight.
Nothing new for the queen as well.
One peculiar feature: the diagonal in the center of the board.
The game is great, but three people are needed.
Close-up of the chess figures.
It's uncomfortable to play on a regular square desk.
General rules:
1. The players take turns clockwise. The right of the first move is determined randomly.
2. The player who makes first check-mate wins.
3. The pawns move straight forward. Accordingly half of the pawns goes to the right, and the other half goes to the left.
The main characteristic of the game: if two players don't like the third, he is doomed.
The funny part of the game: the two players must compete for the privilege to check-mate the third.
Translated from Russian: source
Comments
I've been worried a lot
I've been worried a lot lately about chess getting too easy for me, so I would like to thank you for addressing this urgent problem. What are the rules for a draw?
Too easy for you?
Too easy for you? Try playing someone that doesn't suck.
he was making a joke you
he was making a joke you moron
sarcasm
sarcasm
you realize that unless you
you realize that unless you are a GM, you really can't say jack about chess becoming too easy... also, even if you ARE a GM, which you're not, you will find that games will continue to try you and keep you on your toes....
it's called irony
you are an idiot and cannot tell a joke from a hole in your ass, retard
you are a moron
You are a moron. Anyone that says chess is too easy is just an asshole. You obviously aren't playing the right people.
No he's right - you are the moron.
Wow you really are dense. Is English a second language or something? The guys was being 'ironic' - do you know what that means? Maybe look it up in your Moron-English dictionary (more irony BTW).
Lighten up. Get a life beyond your chess board. Kiss a girl.
Technically...
Your point's perfectly valid and I agree, but technically, that's not irony.
It's closer to sarcasm.
Sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine.
For instance, nothing in the "Isn't It Ironic?" song is ironic.
Nitpicking
> For instance, nothing in the "Isn't It Ironic?" song is ironic.
Yeah, isn't that ironic? ;)
Actually it was irony
The use of words to express something other than and often opposite of their literal meaning IS irony. Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony
I agree with you on your views of "Isn't It Ironic?" but our language evolves and the more people that use "Situational Irony" the more valid it becomes.
omg get over yourselves
seriously guys get over yourselves, i would of thought you would have better things to do than argue with each other over the most pathetic little things such as 'irony' -ect-
Lol, I like your advice:
Lol, I like your advice: Kiss a girl
Amen.
LOL.
That's the first thing that came to mind for me, too.
Like regular chess wasn't hard enough.
We've got to invent three-way and 3-D?
If you're not a chess savant, it takes a lifetime to approach being good at regular chess!
slight issue
interesting... but the first two players would ALWAYS have the advantage over the third!
the reason is that they (first two players) would be able to contol a (significant) percentage more of the center than the third.
however, if your rating is less than 1550, it probably would not matter.
very interesting though
Play with 2 players?
This can be an issue. One fun modification is to play with two players on this board, which opens up a number of diagonal moves.
The Horse Should be able to
The Horse Should be able to also have another movement at the centre not described in the picture, look carefully to find it... hint: picture the centre as a 2x3, instead if the regular 2x2
the horse
it depends on how you define the movement of the horse, if you first go strait 2 and strait to the left or right, then the picture is right. but if you first go one diagonal and then streight to the left or to the right, then the picture is wrong. the second option would probably open too many moves.
Kinght's Move
We sometimes define the knight's move as "up two and over one" to make the familiar "L" shape.
But note that on a standard board, the knight's move is just the closest set of squares which a queen cannot reach. The knight move is like the complement of the queen's move.
Defined that way, there are more alternatives for the knight.
3 or more people
In chess boards with 3 or more people, trading material puts you at a disadvantage unless you make teams.
makes no sense
this chess sucks, makes no sense.
why create such useless things ???
Because if it catches on,
Because if it catches on, then the creator makes a fortune. After all, monopoly doesn't serve any real purpose.
Monopoly was intended as
Monopoly was intended as socialist satire of ruthless landlords.
Moron
You idiot, Monopoly was invented by poor people during the great depression in the U.S., so that they could kill time by throwing around fake money.
I think...
What they should do is remember their roots and invent Great Depression Monopoly.
Everyone starts with six dollars.
great depression monopoly
hahhahaha definitely
Cool
This kinda reminds me of the WWE thing where they have 3 guys going at it and the first person to make someone lose(pin, sub, yaya) wins. It's interesting because now you are forced to both attack and defend your opponents so you can beat them and prevent them from getting beaten by each other. It seems like some relatively weak players could abuse this game, though, to gain undeserved ranking from a more skilled player.
Another idea I just pooped out just now... 3D chess. The idea is that, you put the boards side by side, but they are actually layers... so you imagine one board stacked upon the next, etc. However, it would be difficult to have regular movement and capturing and all, so I envision just being able to move up and down, so say the spot "above" your queen is empty... you could move her there. It's not a very complex or good idea, granted.
I still like the idea I heard of that was attributed to B. Fischer... of having a grab bag of backrow pieces (knight, rook, etc. and some new ones) and at the beginning of the game, pulling 6 of them out randomly and setting them up around your queen in the order you pull them. If Chess is a war simulation (albeit a simple one) it doesn't make sense that you are fighting the same war over and over again.
3-D Chess?
That is a crazy idea - levels of chess boards above and below each other? I've only known of one other person so crazy - his name was Gene something or another. So you just "pooped" that idea out, did you?
3d chess--startrek
i believe the star trek version of chess is the closest match to what you describe as it utilizes 3 or 4 attack boards.
head go splode?
i found a problem with the knight's movement....