Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
How to play Star Trek Tridimensional Chess
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 авг 2024
- Learn the rules to the Star Trek Tridimensional Chess game quickly and concisely - This video has no distractions, just the rules. For a refresher of the original Chess rules, check out this video: • How to play Chess (202...
Play chess online for free here:
link.triplesga...
(As an chess.com affiliate we earn from qualifying subscriptions)
Don't own the game? Buy it here:
amazon.com - amzn.to/3s397V4
amazon.ca - amzn.to/3SSZxin
amazon.uk - amzn.to/3Gi02iG
amazon.es - amzn.to/3ExSebL
amazon.de - amzn.to/3T3frXL
amazon.fr - amzn.to/3fS5zBc
amazon.it - amzn.to/3yrfaW0
amazon.nl - amzn.to/3rCJt8B
amazon.se - amzn.to/3SNqdRL
(As an Amazon Affiliate, I earn from qualifying purchases)
RULES:
The rules are the same as regular chess except for these changes. The bottom level board is white’s board and the top level is black’s board. The middle level is the neutral board. The three levels are suspended one above the other and horizontally offset by half their width so that half of the squares on any board are directly over or under half of the squares on the next level above or below it. This layout may not always be perfectly achieved visually but this is how they officially overlap. You can remember that squares line up by color, for example: a red square is always directly above or below another red square.
The small moveable platforms are called attack boards. The attack boards are placed on the rear pin positions of the white and black boards oriented so that the corner colors match. Setup white’s pawns on the 2nd row of both their main board and attack boards. On white’s main board, on the closest row, setup knight, bishop, bishop, knight. On the attack boards, place rooks on the rear-outer corners, the queen on its matching color, and the king on the other. Mirror this setup for black.
On your turn, instead of moving a piece, you may move an attack board. To move an attack board, it must be occupied by exactly 1 piece. Whichever player’s piece occupies the attack board, that player has the ability to move it. An attack board can move to another pin on the same row or column on its current board, or it can move vertically to a pin on a board above or below it. When moving vertically, it moves to the closest pin. If there is a tie for the closest pin then you may pick which pin to move to. When you move an attack board you may also rotate it 180 degrees if you want. If you do, be sure that the overlapping colors from the boards above and below it still match. Whatever piece is on it rotates with the board. You may not move an attack board to the same pin as another attack board and you may not rotate an attack board without moving it to another pin.
All pieces have their normal chess movement with the following considerations. When moving a piece laterally, along the horizontal plane of a board, the squares located directly above or below each square are considered to be in the same position on a single horizonal plane. It is as if you are above, looking down and treating all the individual boards as one single chess board. In this view, some of the squares would be allowed to hold multiple pieces simultaneously.
Flip the view back to 3 dimensions, and you can see how this is possible because of the vertically overlapping boards. Typically squares will only have 2 boards overlapping, however, due to the location of the attack boards, you can have up to 4 boards overlapping. The number of overlapping squares determines how many pieces can share that square within the vertical space.
A piece may change levels so long as the horizontal path of that piece’s normal move is legal, regardless of its vertical movement. To move a piece to a different level, that piece must first move along its horizontal path, one square at a time. At any point on the path the piece may be repositioned to an unoccupied square above or below the very next square on the path. Then the horizontal move continues and this process repeats until the desired destination square is reached. A piece may leave the edge of a board if there is an unoccupied square above or below the imaginary void square the piece is moving to. Move that piece to that physical square then you may continue its horizontal move. Pieces may not travel into the void beyond that next single square, you must always calculate the path of movement 1 square at a time following these movement rules. Once a piece leaves a level, it may not return to that same level in the same move.
For example, a rook can travel up multiple boards in a single move, in a very specific way, so as to dodge several pieces that are in the way. If there was a wall of pieces all on the same vertical square, blocking the path, the rook may not travel out into the void then up to dodge it. ..
“The rules are the same as chess, except for these changes.”
Never gets old.
Lmao!
that statement undersells the number of additional rules. In the end, it's like a completely new game.
Hey, it's either that or spend twenty minutes explaining every piece and special moves like castling or passant before even starting.
about minute seven I thought to my self, "The same as chess," forced my hand - have to at least watch the video complete; even though now I officially hate four d chess and that's canon.
i think "The first player to check mate his opponent wins" might be most refreshing
these are the clearest, most concise instructions for tri-dimensional chess, no contest. This man has found his niche, and he RULES it!
Ba dum tss
But what about attack squares
@@peepeepoopoo1092 *S H U T*
When three players four-dimesional real-time omega blind bear version with fortresses, can be expected? 🤔
I agree clear and concise. And yet tri-dimensional chess is still confusing.
This is the best description of Star Trek chess.
I have read another description but it left a lot of the gameplay ambiguous. It was like "Either player can move an attack board on their turn. That's all." With this, I feel like it's a playable game.
Unfortunately, the "official" rules are ambiguous and contradictory. I have tracked down multiple "official" rulebooks and they just are not clear. This ruleset is nicely concise and clear.
However, this ruleset (and the most available commercial versions in general) are not compatible with the Star Trek TV show. In the show attack boards are clearly shown upside down. The original Star Trek Chess rulebook had (complex and ambiguous) rules for flipping attack boards upside down. But with the commercially available versions the attack boards are just held up by a small peg that will not hold the attack boards in place if they are upside down. As such, the commercial sets can never recreate the positions seen in the show.
Star Trek Chess unfortunately can also be disappointing to play. A single king on an attack board is incredibly mobile, such that an opposing king+queen combo cannot deliver checkmate.
@@alexanderbrady5486 Yes, I did notice that the attack boards were never upside with these rules. Maybe an upside down attack board is legal but doesn't make any difference.
I'm pretty sure the original rules of the game involved drinking 4-5 martinis and leaning provocatively against a table while pondering your next move. The technical details, the pieces and their moves... are more open to expression.
I think I will have trouble distinguishing the bishops and the pawns. This variant is great overall, the attack boards is truly a unique feature.
the piece designs are all way too similar, except the knights, which stick out like sore thumbs
@@maxomega3 yep
@@maxomega3 u can say that again.
Too many chess sets make the bishops big pawns. Readability is more important than stylishness.
The pieces are modeled after a set that appears in the original series.
Honestly, this actually feels like a legitimately playable game, and not just "move pieces around randomly to give something interesting to look at while the characters share space gossip".
Even more impressive when you consider that the rules were pieced together (pun intended) by fans, one guy in particular with others smoothing things out later, based around that "move[d] pieces around randomly" set-ups. They were only later pseudo-canonized into this game.
the fact that they could adapt a background element into an actual game seems amazing even though I never watched startrek.
@@gegor41311 It helps that it was built on a already existing game. Since the mechanics of Chess were simply manipulated in conjunction with the prop. Figuring out starting placement was probably the hardest part, that and the use of the hovering "attack" plates.
True 3-d chess. Only the 5-d multiversal chess with time travel surpasses this.
How about... Start Trek chess with multiverse time travel?!
@@user-dk5ne2nd7c That would make it ACTUAL 5D chess.
5d diplomacy with multiverse spock travel
@@davidguthary8147 Hmm, wouldn't it only be 4D since time adds another dimension?
@@unliving_ball_of_gas "5D Chess with Multiversal Time Travel" is played in four dimensions: two standard, one time travel, one multiverse travel. Applying those last two dimensions to this game would bring the total to five dimensions.
while not the intention, I found this as an interesting bit of world building, since in star trek you need to think in 3d space for ship combat. it makes sense that they would have a game to help train that way of thinking.
That's how Kirk beat Khan :D
Yet, in the show, they seem to always move their ships on a seemingly flat plane with a universal "up" direction, both during combat and when ships simply "park" next to each other. Curious.
@@markusa3803 yeah they just stand there slugging it out.
@@markusa3803 Limitation of the writers. They're focussed on the characters, not the choreography.
@@watchm4ker I think that's too cut and dry of an answer. The writers were incredibly imaginative and quite bold with the concepts they brought into the Star Trek universe.
I think it's more likely specifically chosen for viewers to be able to enjoy and grasp the action.
I think I like this variant, for the simple reason that it adds complexity to the game without making it completely incomprehensible or something. At least if it is explained as well as you have!
Nah, its still way more confusing than it should be.
As a 700 elo, I think regular chess is compicated enough...
The way you animated the squares in the void was so clear and concise. Great video.
This isn't just a 'how to play' video. This is a how-to for making how-to videos. Amazingly well done.
Finally, The Interdimensional En Passant.
By the en passant your rules provide, a double capture becomes possible if the attack square chosen happens to also contain an opponent's piece.
How would it, a pawn just passed by
@@arkkane9726 It could stand on the upper platform when the pawn was moved on the lower one.
@@dombowombo3076 en passant can't wait a turn. It's a "now or never" type thing.
@@arkkane9726 suppose a knight sits on the neutral board at a player's third rank, and the opposing pawn moves to attack said knight. If the player then pushes a pawn two squares on their own board (along the same file but a different plane than the knight), the opposing pawn takes both the knight and pawn (with en passant) by capturing the knight.
@Muffinconsumer4 It is not forced, it is an option to capture a double-move pawn during the double move. Prior to the double-move rule for pawns from their starting position a pawn advanced to the 5th rank could control pawns still in the starting spaces by capturing them if they moved from the 7th to 6th rank. When the double-move became commonly accepted, pawns on the 5th rank were suddenly weaker because they could be bypassed with the double-move. En passant restored the strength of the position by allowing the player to interrupt the double move by taking the pawn while on the 6th rank. In execution the double move pawn is advanced to the 5th rank and then the responding player captures en passant as if it were still on the 6th rank. Once you allow the double-move pawn to stay on the board for a turn you no longer have the option of interrupting the double move.
the attack board concept is pretty good, plus it's a long video, almost a plus. but why is bishops are just taller pawns?
The bishops and the pawns are already look alike in normal chess, and then they just make this game with the bishops and the pawns are siblings.
@@theomelettecuber5458 at least normal chess makes bishops more thinner and slender and added that gap than this variant which just makes it *L O N G*
Probably because Gene Roddenberry hated religion? 😛
@The Omelette Cuber Bishops are thinner, and have a slit most of þe time.
I legit had "þ" on accident, but it's still the same so I'm keeping it
Anoþer þ enjoyer i see
I like how the last clip is almost not checkmate since the king can move down to the red square on the level below it, but there is part of a white bishop visible on the level below attacking that square.
The knight actually. through the void even.
there should be a chess variant that focuses on attack boards.
A few years back I wrote a Python program to play this variant. I was working with a couple of guys who were training a robot to recognize chess pieces and move them around the board, but we never got as far as connecting my software to their robot. I'm sure I could find the code if anyone's interested
yes
Is it 2 player? If so that would be so cool to play on
And I make one more interested.
@@johntilghman me too please!
@@juancamilogutman164 Not my code, but I was hoping to get a copy for sure.
I'm just waiting for some madman, to combine this with 5d multiverse chess
well it would be finaly closer to the name acheiving 5 D
bcs for the momend is 4D
@@captaineflowchapka5535 there is a 3rd dimension, but only the knighrs have access to it. That's how they jump over other pieces, are least according to 5d chess
Small boards, lots of small boards and have the rules on hand, that's all you'd need
@Hoppeankirk that actually makes so much sense
because when moving knight over piece
you move it over a piece (in 3d)
I realized that the reason that the Federation uses this kind of Chess is because it promotes 3-dimensional thinking, which is important in space-combat or in times when there is no gravity.
That's not even a good way the think of it. The way the pieces move isn't even 3 dimensional. It's fancy 2 dimensional chess! Theres real 3D chess variants that promote 3 dimensional thinking much better then this trash.
Khan, with his supposedly 'superior intellect', obviously didn't play 3D Chess, as Spock says he exhibits "two-dimensional" thinking . . . prompting Kirk to order a Full-Stop then to have the Helm go "Z minus 10,000 meters" etc.
I wonder how a Chess Master like Stanley Kubrick would have done playing 3D Chess, and if he ever saw STAR TREK and knew about this occasional plot element and wondered about trying it out back in the '60s . . . ?
@@andrewmadilecy5704 It's "to think of it," "than this trash.," and "there're." If you're going to criticize something, try using the language properly.
Calling this masterpiece of strategy and imagination combined together with humanity's most historic game of war and intellect "trash", is objectively wrong.
Add on top how it manages to reimagine the game without destroying, but somehow adding to ancient principles this game is closer to genius if not for the marketing potential alone.. alas the ignorant do not appreciate what is too complicated for them to grasp.
Traditional chess is already tridimensional.
"The rules are the same as regular chess, except for these changes"
That joke never gets old.
@@jacencade4019 the joke is the same as regular jokes, except for these changes
Dude that was brilliant i am a ok chess player and have always wanted to have a go at tri but could never get all the rules down it was the attack boards confused me no end. Mate you are legend thank you that was so simple i am gonna bust out my board and set it up and have a go now been sitting there 20 years lol.
literally taking en passant to the next level, nice
Honestly, this is probably the best explanation to tridimensional chess, I have a board, and this got rid of confusion with certain moves
I know very little about playing chess but the first time I saw the Tridimensional Chess board on Star Trek I thought it was so beautiful. This was very interesting and you did a great job explaining how it works. I would like one of these just for a decor piece. Probably one in blue, my favorite color.
i love how what started as just something that looks interesting in the background have been fleshed out into a full game.
This is the best explanation of it ever... And I'm still confused 😂💀 this is truly one of the most complex variants, only beat by 5d time travelling chess
Anyone else remember seeing this Chess board on the cartoon "Recess"?
Vince was embarrassed by how nerdy his older brother was lol.
They called it 4D chess on the show I think.
This is the most nerdy thing ever and I'm all for it.
I absolutely love how the pawns work in conjunction with the attack boards
Thanks for the very clear instructions on how Star Trek Chess works is a game (l had to rewind a few times to get a few rules clear but that's just my slow brain), l have always wondered how it worked since seeing it when l was a kid & seeing it on the show. Shame that while l can play chess, l am no good at it so this doesn't really help me but l do know a few people that do play chess really well and might like the new challenge.
Now imagine if someone put this into 5d chess. Imagine being able to move an attack board back in time.
Wow, this is one trippy board game! Never knew 3D chess had rotating and moving attack boards. Must drive every newbie nuts!
This is the one I’ve been waiting for.
Opening move, the crusade:
Set up, move a pawn and out on your base level and move the queen diagonally out to the edge of your base. Castle on queen side and move your attack board toward the neutral board.
Early- mid game, assuming you're opponent doesn't queen side castle as well, push you're holy crusade attack board of two rooks and two pawns into the neutral part of the board and dominate middle from there.
You can only move an attack board with one piece on it. He said that in the video.
i have seen this game played in the big bang theory, and thats the whole reason why i clicked on this video
Gotta love these chess videos i would like to see more
This is a great video series. You should add another where you play each of these variants, with each player learning the game so there is a sufficient amount of strategy and skill.
Unless I am missing something, it appears to me that the rook's pawns in this chess variant are immobile until either there is a piece it can attack on the diagonal below it or until the attack board containing the pawn is moved, which evidently requires all of the other pieces to vacate it first. This is peculiar, because in ordinary chess, any pawn is initially free to move.
You'd have to move the attack board and rotate it to get that pawn into play
@@CorwinTheOneAndOnly Right, but the initial configuration of the pieces on the main boards and attack boards means that the only pieces which may be initially moved are either the knights' or bishops' pawns or the knights themselves, meaning there are just 6 possible pieces initially available to be moved at the start of a game, while in regular chess there are 10 (any pawn or else either knight) With fewer pieces to initially move, this strongly suggests that there may be fewer interesting opening variations overall as well, this can effectively reduce the overall strategic complexity of the game compared to regular chess, since with apparently less variation on interesting openings, there would also be less variation in strategic mid-game play.
@@markt1964 I'll bet this could get tactically wild. Would be fun to train an engine to play it.
@@travisporco I don't know... In regular chess, any one of the 8 pawns can be advanced in an opening. Most notably, advancing the kings pawn in an opening move in regular chess opens up the diagonals for the king's bishop and the queen, so they are free to move into the board early and develop an attack from a distance in the 2nd move of the game. This game only allows 4 of the pawns to have the ability to move at opening, and while advancing either bishop's pawn does open up the other bishop's ability to swiftly move into the board the next turn, the queen cannot be mobilized until at least the 3rd or 4th move in the game. Finally, there is almost no way at all in this version of the game to move the rook pawn into play until you can move the attack board that pawn is on, which requires that all of the other pieces must have vacated that attack board, which would take a number of moves to accomplish. The slower pace at which you can develop your pieces in this game, and especially the fact that some non-pawn pieces need to be moved before you can even move certain other pawns strongly means that it can be more difficult to develop strong openings, and I feel like the outcome of the game may depend more on luck than on skill and strength of positioning.
I have thought of what I think may be a fix for this problem, however:
I think a slight addition to the rules that allows pawns on attack boards in their opening position to optionally and additionally be permitted to move diagonally for their opening move (either one or two squares), and for their initial move only, be able to dodge pieces that might be blocking their way to a destination square just like a knight does, thereafter adopting the normal 1 square forward move at a time except to attack as a normal pawn move. This move option only applies to the pawns in their initial position on an attack board and does not apply to any other pawns. This additional move option would allow any of the 8 pawns to be developed and moved into play immediately, and creates more initial variance in possible openings, and more opportunity to develop effective long terms strategies that are enabled by those openings.
@@markt1964Less openings, sure. But the mid-game would be incredibly complex considering that the Board itself can change configuration!
based on what I can gather and figure out, I think I've worked out how to move Slider pieces (rooks, bishops and queens) to another level during a move:
lets say you have the follow 4 squares
XY
ZW
they have the following properties:
1) X and W are both actually squares (not void squares) and unoccupied
2) Y and Z can be any of the following: void squares, occupied squares or unoccupied squares (however due to the nature of the board they can't both be void squares)
3)X is directly above Z and Y is directly above W
4) X and Y are next to each other (orthogonally or diagonally)
5) the level X and Y are is directly above Z and W
if a piece moves to W (or starts on W) it can jump to X (regardless of the state of Y and Z according to 2) )and could go past X if the next square on the same level is empty, otherwise it stays on X
forgot to add, if a piece moves to W while moving from the opposite side of Z
also a piece could go the other way towards X and go down to W
and even if it could continue past X/W it can stay on that square
What a weird recommendation from RUclips but a good one. bought this board like 7 years ago. Play weekly with my daughter. Does everyone here play? I have never met anyone else that actually plays.
There are several different rulesets for this game, even with different piece starting positions and movement rules. I'm coming up with my own ruleset.
Ohh. I thought that you could never have pieces above or below each other except during setup. I don't remember The star trek 25th anniversary rulebook being very good. Thank you.
Attack boards, in the original series and the original rules were able to also hang down giving 24 possible places to sit. Meaning all eight boards could be on one of the main 3 boards. But this isn’t touched on. 🤷♂️ Thanks great tutorial.
Ahhh, I always wondered because it clearly isn't standard 3D chess based on the structure of the boards; it appears to be more of a vectored 2D system
Feels like bishops have lost alot of their value with this variation
Fitting in a predominantly atheist setting.
@@Jokie155 That's actually a really interesting, if totally accidental, meta reason. I like it.
@@Jokie155 I don't think that explanation makes any sense. First - the bishop is just a chess piece like any other, it has nothing to do with religion. Originally it was even an elephant (if I remember correctly), the french used "dolphins" for a while and in german the bishop is called "Läufer" (i. e. "runner"). So it has nothing to do with religion. And even if it did, it still is just a name for a game piece, not an actual bishop.
Second - if religion was a concern, they should have renamed the piece as well, which they didn't. In that case they should probably also have renamed king and queen, since the Federation has neither. Which they also didn't do. So, clearly, religion was not a concern.
The "nerf" comes just from the board having less space to move horizontally and diagonally, since the board is only 4 squares wide (plus the attack board, which doesn't cover the whole thing, so most of the time it's 4 squares and sometimes it may have 5 or 6). In essence all horizontal and diagonal movement lost value because of that. But that doesn't only concern the bishop, it also concerns rook and queen and to some extent even knight and king.
Only the pawns are not affected (which is not actually true, since you essentially lose 2 pawns for a rather long time, as the outer pawns on the attack boards can not move until you rotate the attack board or they can take another piece).
@@Barkas247 More so because Star Trek was not a "predominantly atheist setting." Far from it, actually, especially in TOS. The Star Trek universe was one in which mankind had learned to respect the worship and beliefs of other races that they encountered as well as their own. That explanation DOESN'T make any sense, at all. You hit the nail on the head. If that's what ST has turned into, you'll have to forgive me as I haven't watched it since ST TNG was on, and that only sparingly. I had no interest in the later series and especially not in the latest ones.
Oh I see that all makes complete sense and I fully understood the whole game and every rule and during this explanation i most certainly did not lose the will to live at all. Its bollocks Jim but not as we know it.
7:07 That's not really how castling should work, the queen-side rook should take the square next to the king, not the original square of the king. But, I guess there is no position next to the king since they're on the attack boards... Whatever, castling is annoying enough already in 2D chess.
Omg it's like it is how castling should work since it's on a differently shared play area.
I have chosen this video as the first video to be added to my Favorites list in 2023. I am hopelessly nerdy like that.
I have enough trouble keeping up with normal chess, its not for me! lol
But thanks for the introduction to the rules, Ive seen this played on Arc II and Star Trek, and always wondered.
The Internet-notorious "Five-dimensional chess with multiverse time-travel" uses the 1st & 2nd dimensions to play regular chess, then the 4th dimension to travel in time and the 5th to bend timelines, meaning it technically uses 4 dimensions, although it uses up to the 5th. If only the same concept was applied not to regular chess but to 3d chess, then it would have actually been the glorious 5d chess the world deserves.
If you think about it, setting aside Star Trek. This really could be called Space Chess. While regular chess, 3 man, etc. is based on you could say classic methods of warfare, between armies, tanks, troops, ships, heck even jets to a certain extent, maybe submarines.
this really applies well to a form of chess with the idea that you can literally move in all directions with a space ship.
hence making sense chess going tridemensional. it fits the fictional era of star trek perfectly.
Tridemensional sure, you could apply the mystery of quarks here. Maybe they don't disapear, maybe just go somewhere our science can't see yet. Similar to space chess pieces.
I guess you could say that this variation is out of this world.
Badum tss
Clear, concise…very well done. But why did this feel like it was 30 minutes long?
Time dilation. j/k
Can you move an attack board if your King is in check?
Rules don't state otherwise, so I would say yes as long as doing so would move the king out of check.
I think it's interesting that they whipped together this game board as a prop. There was no Tridemensional Chess or rules, they just made it to look neat on Camera. But now, we have rules, designed around a prop that was only suppose to look interesting.
Ok at first I thought this game was needlessly obtuse but as you described it, it became a very cool and complex game. Very cool. If only enough ppl played it lol
So it is both simpler and harder than I imagined from watching the show back when I was far shorter. A single practice game might be enough to internalize the rules, but getting good might take a LONG time
This seems like a prop for a scifi tv show that looks super futury from afar and later got complicated rules shoehorned onto it just because.
Sounds unreasonably complicated.
I love it!
I thought attack boards could move if they had 0 pieces, or only 1 pawn. I was unaware that you could also rotate them 180 degrees. Maybe the Android app I played had different rules.
I don't know how well the programmer wrote the version but no matter, there are at least 4 versions of the rules floating around. Most of them are very incomplete, some of them wilfully contradict previous versions.
@@igrim4777Rules DO NOT float around!
This looks so cool and so confusing! But the instructions in this video are great, as always!
i remember there was a point in star trek when one of them was put into check, and somehow managed to checkmate by moving out of check
you know, i always assumed this would be incredibly difficult to understand, im surprised by how simple it is
Can't help but wonder if there's an instructional video for the Star Wars 3D holographic chess.
Since you can't castle through check in regular chess, would it be you be able to prevent a queenside castling if you threatened the void?
some people say: if it has too many rules it gets boring.
me:but cmon the concept is so cool literally traveling through dimensions (different boards)
I mean, even if the rules take forever to understand, most of them are just taking care of nuances that don't happen most of the time.
This variant is a mockery of really higher dimensional chess.
@@andrewmadilecy5704 true. however im positive this variant came first (dont quote me) but yeah ig
I wanted to thank you since this is the most clear and concise explanation of the rules I've found online and I've done thorough research. Your video I of course watched first and everything else was supplemental but, returning to your video everything makes the most since.
That being said I have one question. Why don't you discuss Inverting attack boards at all?
Because there are so many versions of the rules and most of the ones I've seen don't allow pendant boards.
Please do Stratagema. I need to understand.
This looks really interesting, up intill this point i didnt know much about the game except the chess master they hired to make up the rules absolutly hated the game.
I've been waiting for this for so long
I never knew this was released. I'm going to have to try this out. Thank you
That square misalignment though
"I WILL CRASH THIS ATTACK BOARD INTO THE ENEMY'S REAR LINE, WITH NO SURVIVORS!"
My Pawns
"Wait a minute...."
This is very interesting. Is this game actually fun? Have you/anyone tried it?
This is more like a 2d chess with some tiles being stackable in a layer-wise manner. When I was reading the rules online (and neither from this video) I didn't understand how promotion works with a pawn on the a8/d8 rank with an attack board above it once the attack board is moved by the opponent. When does the pawn promote? What if the attack board contains a black king and there's a risk that such off-turn promotion puts him in check? Also I don't remember the attack board rotation rule. Can it be rotated when moving backwards? Also those rules allowed moving an empty attack board (and they were supposed to have a primary owner). And then there is this completely other version of rules with attack boards both above and below main boards. It seems the rules are still evolving.
Interesting but way above my ability to play. Thanks for sharing.
Does anyone know whether there’s an app or website where I can practice that variant?
Excellent description, as always.
If there is a wall of pieces on the same vertical square blocking the path why does pieces not travel into the void to dodge it?
This is much different than standard 3-D chess. In that, if you have a rook, it can move either side to side (standard movement) OR, up or down, but not both in the same move. Bishops, on the other hand, can move along diagonals through multiple levels, staying on the same color as it had started. But the bishop cannot simply move straight up to another level even if it is on its same starting color. because that is how a rook moves.
This seems to be the old edition rules which are simpler but still fun, the new edition rules were sadly taken down in 2014 and lost to time but it went into great depth about "vertical influence factor" which made for a deeper game, imo
Honestly some of this games rules are worst than I thought they would be 😂 Really want to get into 3D chess but this scares me away. Especially when we get into which pieces can move through the "void" and which can't lol
Glad to be of help in your decision! 🌝
Conceivably you could create a higher dimensional (4+) chess game by using multiple 3D chess boards. Each such board would represent a level in the higher dimension.
This is awesome, aboslutely love it!
if i ever play this version i think im gonna need to save this video cause there is no way i remember all that
finally...the moment have come to see, this interesting game and it did not disappointed...great explication, thou i think it's complicate it is amazing to learn a different way to play, + i like how the pieces looks really cool! Congratulations!
It seems like an interesting concept, but the way I understand it doesn’t black have a clear distinct advantage?
When moving attack boards vertically it would appear you have an option to choose multiple pegs descending, while white has only 1 peg space to ascend.
Perhaps this is intended as a way to offset whites advantage to moving first, but I feel as if having more available moves is a much stronger advantage.
Or perhaps I’m misunderstanding the game. Interesting concept though.
Why not play the one from tng?
This is the definition of the “our chess is different” trope
This actually sounds really fun
As I understand it, when Star Trek (TOS) originally aired, there were no rules for 3D chess. And they didn’t make up rules for the show.
This seems very complicated and obs is when you’ve never played it but chess its self seems complicated until you play it a few times. I bet playing this a lot on a computer so you can see the legal moves. would quickly get familiar
I love your videos so much, you are a professional board game explainer I guess?! 😆😅🥰
😭
Now I want to try!
But who else know this🤷♂️
Excellent video 👍👍👍
Yk as someone who has a love for chess and not necessarily star trek (nothing against it but I never really watched it), I wonder if this is how regular chess feels to non players O.O lmfao
I don't see the point of complicating the positions into more boards. I'd increase the pieces' movement abilities. Both attack and avoid.
Hmm , I had been avoiding acquiring a 3d Chess set due to unsatisfactory rule sets. I might get one now 👍👍Amazing and concise video Thanks!
Traditional chess is already tridimensional.
🤷♂️ The Knight is the only piece in traditional chess that can take advantage of that so......🤷♂️
@@antaresx.8432 The rook can also take advantage of that in the case of castling. But that doesn't change the fact that the pieces and the board are tridimensional objects. Also, you can lift the pieces in the air when you move.
@@Smartness_itself Of course.
Best video out there on this. 🎉
A chess board has a grid consiting of some 64 square's and arranged in an 8 by 8 configuration, all on one plane. It has various rule's, regualation's and law's governing the placement of the various pieces as well as their ability to be moved from one location on the grid to that of another. Though the most common is an 8 by 8 square grid on a single plane. In theory, it could be divided up into numerious but no more than 64 separate planes.
In my youth, after my brother had lost a game of chess to me. Got angry and because the board had been utilized for both the playing of checker's as well as chess for year's. His action's caused the board where it folded to become two separted board's.
He was disaplined by both of our parent's, when the board was now broken, thus no one could or would be able to play either a game of checker's let alone chess. My grandfather who was visiting at the time, heard the commotion and was unable to understand the issue when all we had to do was place the two halves in the position that caused them to look the same as a whole field of play on a single plane.
Becasue there were now two pieces of playing field, which on occasion when they were not exactly joined together as they were offically. We would continue to play either checker's or chess on the two separate individual pieces. And simply deal with their being at first closely separated and on occasion farther separated. And that was a couple of decade's before Star Trek caused a stir in the chess community when they utilized the same 64 squared grid into not only separate playing fields as we had done. But on separate planes as well. In theory, though it's possible and assumably extremely difficult to come to grips when playing. Checker's or chess could be played on a various separate playing field's of upto 64 separate planes.
nah man, those pawns and bishops are wild.
I've never heard this explained before and now I want to play