What if the four middle squares didn't exist? Could you play a game where a piece couldn't pass through, or land on squares d4,e4,d5,e5. Or prehaps if that is too difficult they can pass through but not land on. so a bishop at f2 would still control the diagonal.
In the same way as Fisher Random chess can be fun. Could this work?
Originally posted by Paul DiracI'm sure it's been one of the many suggested variations of chess, and I was thinking the same last night. If there's there's no flanks to the game - Knight on h3 controls g5f4 etc as well as a5, b4 etc. Bishops can cross flanks. It's an interesting idea and could make for a lot of fun, but negates one of the basic principles of warfare which is to secure your flanks before engaging in battle.
I sometimes find myself pondering how the game would change if the a file and h file were considered adjacent, as if the chess board were wrapped like a tortilla... Bringing to mind the saying, "A puzzle wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a flour tortilla." 😀
It's almost certainly been suggested and tried before and has a name and a history. Like 3-D chess. Can someone add more?
Originally posted by JackOfAllThat has been done already. I'm not sure if it is the star wars or star trek chess board. It has three levels and separate 'attacking' boards whih can be moved about from level to level, off loading and taking on pieces. It is most bizarre.
how about a multi story chessboard with squares in which you can cross over from level to level?