On Apr 9, 10:52 pm, Quadibloc wrote:
On Apr 7, 8:40 pm, Quadibloc 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 Heraclitean enough...

John Savard

I believe Heraclitean (or is it Heraclitian, 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 Heraclitean
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 Heraclitean game state.
Also, another question is whether or not a game that is Heraclitean 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. Heraclitean
game rules, not just a Heraclitean GAME, would end up being infinite.

- Rich