Re: Is Hera****ian (aka Calvinball) Chess possible?

On Apr 9, 10:52 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 7, 8:40 pm, Quadibloc <jsav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > But my version, on the 12 by 8 board, offers up to 16,200 variants -
> > all tidy and symmetrical like normal Chess, so it might meet this
> > particular goal.
>
> I kept the original set of versions of Random Variant Chess, and the
> 10 by 8 version I added at the last, but I've replaced the other
> recently added versions (Historical Random Variant Chess and Mutable
> Random Variant Chess) by something which has included their best
> features, but made more organized and rationalized, which I call
> Progressive Random Variant Chess (the Progressive part has to do with
> the placement of the Camel and the Giraffe on the board if they are
> used) and which offers more possibilities - up to 172,620 possible
> variants of Chess on the 12 by 8 board.
>
> Perhaps this might be Hera****ean enough...
>
> John Savard

I believe Hera****ean (or is it Hera****ian, as I am using it, not
just full of strife, but never twice) is supposed to be either it is
or isn't.  If one wants to argue whether a game itself is Hera****ean
in the possible number of moves it could have (aka unbounded or
infinite), then perhaps one wouldn't need to have an infinite number
of rules or staring configurations to reach a Hera****ean game state.
Also, another question is whether or not a game that is Hera****ean in
number of game states could ever be solved, or that there is always a
counter strategy or line to the one that is developed.  Hera****ean
game rules, not just a Hera****ean GAME, would end up being infinite.

- Rich