How would you improve chess?

Go on, wow me.

>inb4 muh first-turn advantage

explain the design rationale behind horses to me first
That's some seriously arbitrary shit

Why do they only move in "L" shapes once?
Why not perpetually move in "L" shapes, like most of the other pieces do?

Why are all the special moves "one-use" only, forcing you to remember which moves have already been used by which pieces?

Gladly. Because you have a pawn line, and because other pieces cannot move through each other, many games where pawn exchanges do not happen come to lockdown situations forcing the players to either play a gambit or agree on a tie. Knights are give a unique power to teleport to act as a wild element that negates such scenarios. It's a damn fun piece two, forking plays and all.

Why not be allowed to have all friendly pieces move through each other?

>Why are all the special moves "one-use" only, forcing you to remember which moves have already been used by which pieces?
You mean, en passant? If you can't remember what happened literally 1 turn ago, you probably shouldn't be playing chess at all.

>No hidden information
>No random chance
The "game" (if you can call it that) is fundamentally garbage. It is a memorization puzzle and nothing more. It is a very complicated memorization puzzle, but it's still just a puzzle to be solved, not played. Don't believe me? Then ask yourself, does who you are playing against EVER matter? If I'm playing against Gary Kasparov or a blind random number generator the optimal move at any given board state never changes.

>B-but h-humans aren't p-perfect! You can exploit mistakes!
You can exploit mistakes in tic-tac-toe as well. It does not make it an actual game. This is the fundamental problem with any activity where you can perfectly predict, regardless of your opponent, what all the possible outcomes of a given action are. It just reduces the game to a mess of "Well, I could do X, but it won't work if they realize to react with Y." And why wouldn't you assume they would react with Y given infinite time to analyze the totally unambiguous board state?

What the fuck am I reading

1-All pieces can capture en-passant.
1.1-Assuming pawn moved just one step instead of two, and an piece would be able to capture the pawn at this situation, the piece can capture the pawn by doing the same move and removing the pawn.

2-You can't put your king at check, UNLESS its the only thing you can do (asking for draw, or resign dont count).
2.1-The point of the game is to capture the king.

>explain the design rationale behind horses to me first

chess works like this

Rook move to the closest square from the one he is (assuming Von Neumann neighborhood), that is not the one he is at. He is a rider.

Bishop move to the closest square from the one he is (assuming Von Neumann neighborhood), that is not the one he is at or one rook can move to. He is a rider.

Knight move to the closest square from the one he is (assuming Von Neumann neighborhood), that is not the one he is at. Can move to 4 different positions, so lets make him normal.

Queen is the powerfull version of a king, it move like rook and bishop. But not knight (to be able to be a powerfull king).
King move like a one step version of all pieces excluding knight, because knight already move just one step.

Pawn move like rook, but just one step and only without capturing and move like a bishop only one step and only when capturing. It promotes to avoid the piece become immobile at last rank

Archon? 80s did it.

>Have real people play the pieces, each time you go to take a spot they fight to the death.
Not the same thing, but there was a real game variant like this made during the twitch plays pokemon craze.

Each side has 8 players, each one plays a pawn.
Each side move only once per turn and the first legal move made by some player of the side is the one.

If a player promote, he decide the piece and will play with this piece now.
If some player die, he select a piece not controlled by another player and must use it.

Your side win when someone checkmate the enemy king

Favourite chess variants?

>only move in L once
Have you ever played chess my dude?

Pawns have 2 available moves-
>move forward
>turn 90 degrees left or right

Pawns can still only move "forward" but now forward is relative to the piece's orientation, not to the board

No more need to promote, which is a dumb practice.

>No more need to promote, which is a dumb practice.

Oh good, now instead of half of games ending in a draw they all can

youtu.be/GEGdoktIwwA?t=49

Queens can jump like knights.

how would allowing that be any less arbitrary than not.

>And why wouldn't you assume they would react with Y given infinite time to analyze the totally unambiguous board state?

>I wonder why games are played with clocks instead of infinite time.

turn one, white checks black with queen.
black cannot move king and cannot block, because the queen can jump over things.
White always wins.

Literally retarded suggestion.

List of chess DLC pieces:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairy_chess_piece

>Edgehog

You have to build your own army like in a wargame but instead of plastic men you use small animals. You can't control them at all, they're fully autonomous and must figure it out themselves. There's a lot of strategy you see, picking the right army and all that will kill the enemies but not each other.

I'd ban ugly and/or fat people from playing it.

Actually this improves every game.

Permadeath.

>King
Has a flintlock ability that can terminate one enemy piece within two of his movement spaces, once per game. Does not work against enemy kings.

>Queen
Can force the enemy player to move a piece of the queen's choosing on his next turn, instead of any piece that player would want. Once per game.

>Rook
Can castle any piece, one castling per game.

>Knight
Can issue a fighting challenge to any piece of the enemy player, that player must move that piece on his turn. One challenge per game, and if the player can't make the move for some reason (trapped piece, would put the king into check, etc) then the challenge is forefit

>Bishop
When taking a piece, once per game the bishop can "convert" the piece to your side.

>Pawn
Pawns touching allied knights on a cardinal direction may move two spaces, even if it's not their first move. (Squire)

mortal kombat chess?
Trust me it was shit.

When a piece goes to capture another piece, another, smaller game of chess is started to see which piece emerges victorious. Capturing is done normally in the smaller game.

drops

...

RPG elements

FPS elements

Knight and Queen functionally have the same ability, and would easily and obviously be used to create checkmates
>Check someone and declare a challenge on any piece that can't block the check

Check our Bobby Fischer's improvements and tell me that it doesn't sound like a better game

However: these microgames run concurrently. On your turn you can move one main piece and make a move on each microboard. If a main piece enters the territory of an enemy piece locked in a microgame, it is an instant kill on the opponent's main piece(they were distracted by a game) and the microgame is nulled.

You can sacrifice X number of pawns to play an extra movement with a piece with a relative value of X points.
Example, play a rook, sacrifice 5 pawns and play that rook again.

What about mobile games mechanics:

>Every move costs Stamina
>Stamina is limited, so you can opt to Wait
>Wait costs gold
>Earn gold by defeating enemy pawns
>Stamina can be replenished by defeating 'hero' units (rook, knights etc)

That chess table is set incorrectly. For both sides, the lowest left tile should be the dark one.

>infinite time
chess computers were a mistake

You can move as many pieces as you want at any time, including on your opponent's turn. However any move except the first require you to sacrifice one piece.

King can be picked up and hurled at the board. Any piece knocked down counts as removed from game. King is then placed on any free corner. If no corner is free king cannot be picked up.

Bishops and queens (of the same color) can be placed on the same square.

Also, you can sacrifice X pawns to allow the king to have a movement range of X during one turn.
You can only use this special movement once.

I love powerups that require sacrifices.

The biggest problem (some consider it a strength) with chess is how tight the balance is. Basically, losing one pawn to a half-way decent player is a game over. What if we introduce a shogi-ish rule that allows a certain degree of mistakes, while also potentially expanding the tactical/strategic possibilities and making the game way more aggressive:
Whenever a piece is taken, it is placed on a ressurrection track of say, 5-6 turns. A piece moves one step in the end of the respective player's turn, capturing enemy pieces also moves your piece one step more. Once the piece travels the whole track, a player may choose to spend a turn to place it on back row (1 for white, 8 for black). Each player can only have 1 piece on the track at any moment, but may choose to take it off the track and instead place another piece at the start of the track if this particular piece is more important immediately (this is an action done instead of moving a piece down the track). A player can have any number of pieces that went through the track in reserve ready to be placed back on the board at any time.

...

The only improvement of his that I know of is the random starting placement for non pawn pieces. Are there more?

I only know this because I read a bunch about him after /pol/ told me he hated Jews (and was also a Jew)

Chess is fine, its just ruined by waac fags and compeditive play

this is the greatest thing I have ever seen

No, I mean that queens can move in an L-shaped path, exactly as knighs can, and that's the only time they can jump over pieces.
I.E. you never need to deal with turning your pawns into knights instead of anything else

Implement “wall pieces” that opponents can’t take or move through

I tactically bait opponents with pawns. Have I been playing wrong this whole time? Serious question—I want to up my game, but am kinda reckless as a person

Bait them where?

Everywhere. I bait their non-pawns with pawns. Btw I’m not saying I’m God’s gift to chess. I just want to get better at Humanity’s Game

...

This is some next dimensional shit but let's go one layer deeper:

> Layer 1: Two players playing chess. Pieces are humans who play a game of chess in battles for spatial supremacy.

> Layer 2: Those human pieces play with human pieces in turn.

> Layet 3: Those human pieces play normal chess.

Odd angles. Bishops and Rooks threaten in four directions, Pawns two, King and Queen 8. Knights? 8, and they can bypass friendly pieces. Knights are three dimensional horrors within the game of chess.

> 2/2.1
What do you think Check and Checkmate are?

The back row of pieces are shuffled every game (still symmetric for both players).

The Knight version disallows that, since you're not allowed to leave a check state unbroken by the base game rules and the knight challenge fails if it can't be completed.
The Queen version, on the other hand, needs to be replaced with something else because it has no such stop on it.

I've never really gotten to play a variant because I couldn't find any online programs that supported anything beyond time constraints.

Is this loss?

RNG elements.

>all joker army with 1 king piece
imagine

Terrain that is randomly placed each player turn

>I bait their non-pawns with pawns.

What does this even mean? You trick them into taking your pawns and losing their quality pieces by doing so? Do you play against infants, or just the retarded?

I did a version where each piece when fighting rolled a die and lowroll killed. King and Queen got 3. Other major pieces got 2. Pawns had 1.
>>rpgmechanicsbutcomeatmebro

Players can alter the starting location of pieces to some extent.
Each player would choose a starting formation, unknown to the other player. Then, before the first turn after each opponent has seen the other player's formation, they both get to make some limited changes to their formation.

are you even trying user?
lichess.org has bughouse, antichess and other variants

Rooks move at 90 degree angles
Bishops at 45 degree angles
Knights move at 30 and 60 degree angles

The only thing that makes them arbitrary is that they cant continue to ride along their paths like bishops and rooks, but then again they can jump pieces so its a trade off.

^This was in reply to this v

Add a bunch of new rules and conditions

Bishops move at 90 degrees just like rooks, they're just rotated. Only the queen moves at 45s.

Add random loot boxes for the humble price of $2.99! Try your luck at obtaining custom skins for every piece! A gunmetal bishop? A rainbow queen? All is possible for the tiny price of $2.99 per loot box!

it's the poker argument again, you know what you can do, and how that affects the board, but you don't know what your opponent will do-- you know what they should do, but they can decide not to do that, not because they don't know what they're doing, but to fuck with you

I would uninstall the game for starters

I'd play go instead.

Veeky Forums chess is older than loss

>What's Crazyhouse?

He's also the guy who added increments to the time controls, iirc.

>What are gambits?

Gambits are super rare unless they're pseudo-gambits, like Queen's Gambit

Exchange each pieces with a shot of alcohol.
Whenever you captured a piece, you have to drink it (yes you, not your opponent).
So now the game become a strategy game of capturing enough pieces to win without drinking too much until your mind can't think, while trying to offer your opponent as many unimportant pieces so he drinks himself to stupor..

Chess 2 is actually pretty cool.

Except the bidding mechanic.

move the rule from checkers over so if you can take a piece you have to

Because mounted forces flank

It's mechanically irrelevant.

whenever you combine two, a 1 life quake 3 deathmatch begins.

pieces get different weapons and hp, so a queen could still annhilate a pawn.

Don't announce check. King can move into check. No checkmate. Game ends when king is captured.

Sounds like Suicide Chess.
>pieces move as normal but you have to take if you can
>the game does not end when the King is captured
>the King can be captured
>the game ends when the winner manages to get his or her opponent to take their last piece
surprisingly difficult.
>If you put your King in check you should just lose
This is a stupid rule. Why? Because if you're any good at chess at all you know that "hoping my opponent is dumb" is not a good or interesting strategy. Checkmate exists to make sure that boring blunders like those don't immediately end games -- unless it's timed chess, where the King can actually be taken, in which case that's the point. Making chess into timed chess without a timer doesn't fix anything. Get good.

>

This is fine. Since the point is to capture the king, it makes sense that when the king is captured, the game is over as simple as that.

Saying "check" would be just another french courtesy to warn your opponent that the game is about to end.

>You can't put your king at check, UNLESS its the only thing you can do (asking for draw, or resign dont count).
t. nigel short

stop asking for stalemate to = a win, because that's all that rule does.

>not letting your opponents take back turns to feel superior
>not condencendingly rewinding the game 10 turns back to give them another oppotunity to fuck up