Single Comment

Turnover. Three ring sizes fit into each other, combining and splitting into different pieces, sometimes taking over your opponent's.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

H. G. Muller wrote on Sun, Jun 23 09:38 AM UTC in reply to Michael Taktikos from 08:38 AM:

I agree that point 3 you referred is expressed somehow unclear, leaving the impression that its wall can turnover in every direction including sideways, but that would contradict point 0.

Well, it is obvious that it contradicts the behavior of that applet. I don't see any contradiction with the rule you quote, though; both sentences indicate that turnover is possible if you make one step forward. (And the only possible turnover targets are Fort and Citadel.) One would expect the castling description to apply only to the moves indicated in the diagram as 'castle' (i.e. white dots), which is indeed in every direction but forward. The first two points in the castling rules indeed make that exception. The third point does not have to make it, because it addresses turnover options, and the rule for forward moves already specified that these also exist for forward moves.

Note that the applet you refer to does allow friendly turnover for diagonally forward moves (but not to sideway moves). If I play b2-b3 (leaving a Citadel on b2), the next move I can play a1-b2 to turnover that Citadel. After c1-c2, c1-b1, c1-b1 it does not allow a1-cb1, though. So the applet doesn't treat all the castling squares the same way, which casts a lot of doubt on its correctness.

From a Comment by the inventor in 2020 I am starting to suspect that the castling moves are only allowed when in check. It is not clear what in check means in this variant, as it seems to have multiple extinction royals, and it is not illegal to leave those under attack. My best guess is that it applies to your only remaining Castle facing destruction. This is still a bit ambiguous, as without the castling move you could be forced to disassemble your last Castle, even if there is no external threat. The castling rule makes positions with a bare Castle (or Castle plus blocked Walls) viable, by allowing the Castle to stay a Castle when you move it (under zugzwang or to evade capture).

It is clear that the linked description is grossly inadequate...

[Edit] A demo game on facebook suggest that any Castle that could be captured on the next move is allowed to make a 'castling' move to evade the attack. But zugzwang forcing self-destruction does not enable castling, but results in the game ending as a draw there.

It appears the rules of this variant are still fluid. The start position of the applet is also different from the one shown in the article here.