Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Site Ideas Forum

Site Ideas Forum

  1. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    16 Sep '09 08:53 / 1 edit
    Vote 17

    Your input on this matter is appreciated.

    * This thread will be cross posted - but please comment in this thread *
  2. 16 Sep '09 09:20
    could you explain a bit more as to what you mean or send me a personal message
  3. 16 Sep '09 09:27
    I would like to vote on an option that is not there.
    I like 960 or similarish shuffle i`m not fussy which rules.
    I also like bughouse.
    I don`t play giveaway chess .
  4. Subscriber Kewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    16 Sep '09 09:32
    I support Fischer Random or 960. If I wanted to play other variants I'd go to a chessvariants website, there are enough of them out there.
  5. Subscriber Crowley
    Not Aleister
    16 Sep '09 09:47
    Why anyone would vote against options is beyond me.

    I have no idea what variants can be played, but I don't care.
    More options means more people on this site, which means more revenue, which translates into continued quality service.


    Bring on the options, Russ!
  6. 16 Sep '09 11:00
    I'd definitely play chess 960 if it were available. It is indeed hard to imagine why anyone should vote against variants. I wonder how many people would actually play various variants if they were available, though?
  7. 16 Sep '09 11:07
    Agree that a vote is not really needed.

    Having the option on the site will be another attraction.

    If the option to play these forms of chess is available and you do
    not want to play them. Then don't.
  8. Standard member zozozozo
    Thread Killing Chimp
    16 Sep '09 11:08
    Originally posted by Erekose
    It is indeed hard to imagine why anyone should vote against variants.
    I wont play them so dont need them.
    Not having them on the site makes the site more easy to understand.

    If there are variants the Admins will have to put time in it. Which means the quallity of the rest of the site suffers from the presence of variations.
  9. 16 Sep '09 11:13
    I would like to play chess960 AKA Fisher Random from time to time.
    Fisher Random with it's own rating system would be great.
  10. 16 Sep '09 11:20 / 2 edits
    I used to think variants were stoopid.
    I was at a different site, and they only play tourneys. I saw "Big Chess Tournament," so I thought it was a tourney with more than the usual(6 or 7 I think) entrants in it, so I entered.

    Big Chess is the name of that site admin's pet project, a variant on a 16x16 board, each player having 32 pcs, some of which looked to be randomly placed.

    I looked at my game board page, shrugged my shoulders and said, chess is chess so let's do it. I tied for first, had a blast playing the 2nd seed and mauling him badly.

    In short I was surprised how fun it was, and I was relaxed knowing that my competition was a human. (No engines play Big Chess)
  11. 16 Sep '09 11:32
    I don't know what chess variants are, but I agree with Crowley's point that more choice is usually a good thing.

    If you build it, they will come.
  12. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    16 Sep '09 13:03
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Agree that a vote is not really needed.

    Having the option on the site will be another attraction.

    If the option to play these forms of chess is available and you do
    not want to play them. Then don't.
    I am quite interested, because I spoke with someone recently who stated that variants get very little play on their service, even 960, which surprised me.

    Now, I have had a side project through the summer writing code to support any number of 2 player variants, and integrating it with RHP would be rather tricky. Just adding 960 would be far simpler.

    So, I just want to get a feel for the what people think they want.

    And of course, there is plenty of stuff that should take priority over this, but at least I can plan for the future.
  13. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    16 Sep '09 14:59 / 1 edit
    I think it's a nice idea, but I can't promise I'd play any of these. except for the old Indian game (Wikipedia calls it Shatranj) which would be interesting to play. You could implement separate ratings for these games.
  14. Standard member caissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    16 Sep '09 23:31
    Why not 4-way chess? The variant with double pawn moves is superior.
    4-Way Chess was created in London in the mid 1800's.
    The board is simply 3 ranks added to each side.
    Russ,I will be happy to assist you with all rules if you should decide to offer this variant.
  15. 17 Sep '09 17:23
    Originally posted by Crowley
    Why anyone would vote against options is beyond me.

    <snip>

    Bring on the options, Russ!
    Not voting against, but saying that I would not play often. You can have it if you like, but of little benefit to me.

    As stated by others, I'd go for separate ratings or unrated.

    I have not tried, but is it already possible to set up a start position as anything you like? I note that fischer-random is already available under the "new game" menu. So I guess the only difficulty is checking that the castling and other rules are followed, and maybe giving a clearer indication that an invite is for variant-XY.