Talk:3139: Chess Variant

I should add support for playing this to my WIP chess library. 73.164.32.149 21:43, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I feel nerdsniped by this one, and I'm not even into chess. Should you either slide a tile or move a piece in your turn, or should you do both, or should you move a piece on your turn and slide a tile on your opponent's turn? Also, should it disallow sliding the board back to its immediately previous state, to avoid the back-and-forth situation on the title text (but would still allow moving in circles)? Which would be more fair, and reduce the chance of draws? So many questions... 185.81.126.164 22:00, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I have another, but related, question about the sliding, on the assumption of it being "move or slide", each turn: Do you have to fully move a tile, or may you half-move it? It would give the opponent only the chance to either complete or reverse the 'slide', if they found it tactically more advantageous to do either (would depend upon which pieces, of either side, were 'loaded' on the 2x2 as it moved; and/or perhaps which through-paths were enabled/disconnected for each slider-position; and a half-move completed by the opposing player is effectively a 'free slide'-then-move for the original player, if not accountsd for in other ways). But, if the opposing player chooses (or is forced; perhaps from 3-repeat/5-repeat consequences, or even due to potential "discovered check" exposures?) not to complete/reverse the half-slide, then does the loading/unloading any bishop upon the half-moved 2x2 (with the black/white chequerboard temporarily misaligned in the vicinity) give it an opportunity to change which shade of diagonals are its 'home'?

Yes, it'd be simpler (relatively!) to just require it to be whole-tile (2x2-square) sliding, but it'd be more interesting to consider the (otherwise valid) half-disjointed positions. Especially insofar as it works for the combined bishopry on the board! 82.132.238.63 08:29, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hooooookay. If 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 , it's Black's move in canonical chess. For the position shown in this variant, White would have to be allowed to move a piece and a sliding section: 3. d4 & ef34>gh34, Black to move. Why White would use the extra move to double down on surrendering the center of the board, sacrificing the gambit pawn for no apparent benefit, is beyond me. At best, this is taking hypermodernism to incomprehensible extreFOOOOOOOOM. Ow ... 2605:59C8:160:DB08:816E:805:44F1:B553 00:45, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Couldn't this be black beginning their turn by moving a tile? 2603:8001:0:46DC:117A:208A:40D2:9A5F 06:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

What is the starting position of the tiles? Can ranged pieces pass over the “gap”? Can you slide a row of tiles at once or only one? 2A02:AB88:7815:7E80:E212:8D1:BCBB:7DD8 01:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Can that black pawn advance straight to the tile in front of the king or is it stuck until the gap is filled? 2603:8001:0:46DC:117A:208A:40D2:9A5F 06:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps the most balanced starting position would be a complete board, with removing an unoccupied tile (once only) being one possible move.196.245.54.177 05:32, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

How long do you think it will be until someone actually implements this? 206.193.5.5 23:04, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Buddy I am working on it 73.164.32.149 03:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hope you make a version that allows En Passant with a pawn that had the tile slide --2604:3D09:84:4000:9CC4:9BCE:BD01:C811 05:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Do we specify positions for the transcript or do we just say "scotch opening"Mathmaster (talk)

Could you just slide yourself out of ladder checks then?

This reminds me of the Twist and slide cube. Fabian42 (talk) 04:12, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

For anyone interested, a pretty awesome board game somewhat similar to this concept already exists called The Amazing Labyrinth.
Listing on BoardGameGeek / Listing on Ravensburger website / Wikipedia page.
— Lheydon (talk) 05:08, 9 September 2025 (UTC)