Higher version of chess (more numerous squares & pieces and complexity) is not possible.

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Higher version of chess (greater number of squares & pieces and complexity) doesn't have more magnificence. It is because the field is so wide that there is no scope for more complicated and interesting interplay. Even with best moves, pieces get exchanged and it is reduced to dull empty board game. The current form of 64 squares is the optimum setting. The other alternative is 3-dimensional chess. But that too has the same limitation although the standard is better than the 2-dimensional arrangement. Now you know why nobody suggests increasing the number of squares or pieces on the chess board.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Chess will remain same as Indians invented it.

 

[DoTell]

Higher version of chess (greater number of squares & pieces and complexity) doesn't have more magnificence. It is because the field is so wide that there is no scope for more complicated and interesting interplay. Even with best moves, pieces get exchanged and it is reduced to dull empty board game. The current form of 64 squares is the optimum setting. The other alternative is 3-dimensional chess. But that too has the same limitation although the standard is better than the 2-dimensional arrangement. Now you know why nobody suggests increasing the number of squares or pieces on the chess board.

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Chess will remain same as Indians invented it.

this is a common misconception my firend.I'm an Indian and an avid chess fan.but it is still not clear who invented Chess.Researcher says in the same time frame,various countries started playing Chess Like Games.India possibly had one of the most closest and oldest cousin of modern Chess,Chaturanga.but the Modern chess was born in Europe.

Chaturanga was little bit different than modern Chess...

 

[Sneaker]

this is a common misconception my firend.I'm an Indian and an avid chess fan.but it is still not clear who invented Chess.Researcher says in the same time frame,various countries started playing Chess Like Games.India possibly had one of the most closest and oldest cousin of modern Chess,Chaturanga.but the Modern chess was born in Europe.

Chaturanga was little bit different than modern Chess...

"Modern" is the key. But the chess was invented in India. From there it transferred to Persia and China independently. The persian one is what reached Europe. This what historians can tell as accurate as possible. What is the difference between Chaturanga and chess (except for enpassent, castling and pawn doubling?)

 

[Sine Nomine]

Modern chess was born in Europe.

Modern concept was brought forward by Arabs and when they went into Europe, chess found it's way in to Europe,when Europe was rising at that time both Indians and Arabs were at fast decline,many Indian and Arab inventions are known in west by those who introduced them in Europe.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Chess will remain same as Indians invented it.

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

My post was not really a statement. It was actually a hidden question. Some day the 8x8 chess (latest 2D chess) will be solved. What then? I was hoping that someone would disagree with my statement and say that a bigger chess board might not be an empty board game and it might give rise to a new possibility.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

 

[The enlightened]

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

Indeed. The new 3d chess should have the following pieces - King, Queen, Knight, Bishop, Rook, Rafale and Typhoon.

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

Indeed. The new 3d chess should have the following pieces - King, Queen, Knight, Bishop, Rook, Rafale and Typhoon.

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

Indeed. The new 3d chess should have the following pieces - King, Queen, Knight, Bishop, Rook, Rafale and Typhoon.

Kind of out of place on a "defense" forum, but interesting topic nonetheless. What about going 3D? Have you ever thought about playing chess in an 8x8x8 cubical space? If the current 2D chess game mimics ancient warfare, 3D chess has been long overdue for the modern days. At least one extra piece with air strike capability needs to be added. Such a game would be hard to implement and play in the real world, but in the virtual world of computer it is definitely very feasible.

Indeed. This 3d chess board should have the following pieces - King, Queen, Knight, Bishop, Rook, Rafale and Typhoon

 

[DoTell]

View attachment 183589

Wow that's a cool game! Thanks for sharing. But this is not exactly what I have in mind. The Star Trek chess game still uses the same set of pieces. Yes the game is played into the 3rd dimension but there is really no 3D weapon. Still, I like this game so much I might buy one to study it.

Speaking of virtual games, I created one myself years ago as shown on my avatar. I named it Gliding Cube. Look carefully, this is not the Rubik's Cube we all know about. The Rubik's Cube spins the slices, but the Gliding cube sildes the tiles. Solving it requires completely different methods. Here is how it's played.

I planed to allow sides of the Cube to flip inside out, thus create a double sided cubic puzzle. It'd be extremely difficult to solve since you can't see what's on the inside. That'd be a cool toy for the advanced creatures in Star Trek, wouldn't it?

 

[GR!FF!N]

What is the difference between Chaturanga and chess (except for enpassent, castling and pawn doubling?)

first and most distinct one is board settings...

in chess,Kings and Queens face each other.in Chaturanga,a King faces opponent's queen.

 

[Sneaker]

first and most distinct one is board settings...

in chess,Kings and Queens face each other.in Chaturanga,a King faces opponent's queen.

Interesting. Is there any complete set of rules available somewhere? I always wonder why there are so many versions. Even in pic you have posted, it shows bishop=elephant, but in our local variety, rook=elephant and bishop=chariot (chatur-anga= cavelary, elephant, chariot and infantry)...

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Higher version of chess (greater number of squares & pieces and complexity) doesn't have more magnificence. It is because the field is so wide that there is no scope for more complicated and interesting interplay. Even with best moves, pieces get exchanged and it is reduced to dull empty board game. The current form of 64 squares is the optimum setting. The other alternative is 3-dimensional chess. But that too has the same limitation although the standard is better than the 2-dimensional arrangement. Now you know why nobody suggests increasing the number of squares or pieces on the chess board.

Consider a chess board of 16x16 squares and proportionately greater number of pieces. Now the additional pieces would be so far from each king that it would have no effect on the game. Even if the pieces are pushed towards either king, the opponent pieces will be so many that it will give rise to simple subgames. And these subgames are restricted to their respective subregions unrelated to and insulated from other subgames. Logically the overall game isn't anymore riveting than the 8x8 variant.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Interesting. Is there any complete set of rules available somewhere? I always wonder why there are so many versions. Even in pic you have posted, it shows bishop=elephant, but in our local variety, rook=elephant and bishop=chariot (chatur-anga= cavelary, elephant, chariot and infantry)...

there are plenty..in fact,it had multiplayer version as well..though I don't know the rules..

Chaturaji - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

In variants of chess, does increasing the number of squares and proportionately increasing the number of squares increase the complexity of the game? Yes and No! This rule holds only upto some point. Beyond that the effect tapers off. If a graph of chess variant’s complexity against number of squares and pieces are drawn, it would be as shown in my following post: