Not sure what this exact variant would be called. However here are the rules. Thought it up myself although I did take some elements from other variants.
Pieces move, and attack the same as in regular chess with the exception of the king.
Both players are "in the dark". This means that the only squares in which you can see are ones in which you can either move to or capture on. Pieces that you can not capture or move to the square they are on are invisible to you.
Also both sides start with a different random 960 positions so you really really do not know where the enemy pieces are.
This would add a "fog of war" element to the game.
I think it would be pretty cool because chess is an older game, and war back in the day did not have satellites, radar, aircraft, sonar ect as scouting to know where everything was on the battlefield.
Kings are not to be checkmated, but captured the same as any other piece.
Kings are wiser than the distance they can move. They have the best vision. They only move regularly like a king, but have the vision of both a queen, and a knight giving you important intelligence to be able to see more squares.
Finally the game is not won when you capture the enemy king. Real soldiers would not stop fighting if their general died. Instead it is a game of attrition where you must capture everything your opponent has on the board before victory is declared.
A draw happens if there is no possible ways for attrition to happen, (for example both sides only have pawns that are locked up left, or both sides only have opposite color bishops left) or if it is agreed, or for the 50 move rule.
The computer puts a question mark over every square you can not see automatically, and acts as the arbiter keeping both sides honest.
Thoughts?
Pieces move, and attack the same as in regular chess with the exception of the king.
Both players are "in the dark". This means that the only squares in which you can see are ones in which you can either move to or capture on. Pieces that you can not capture or move to the square they are on are invisible to you.
Also both sides start with a different random 960 positions so you really really do not know where the enemy pieces are.
This would add a "fog of war" element to the game.
I think it would be pretty cool because chess is an older game, and war back in the day did not have satellites, radar, aircraft, sonar ect as scouting to know where everything was on the battlefield.
Kings are not to be checkmated, but captured the same as any other piece.
Kings are wiser than the distance they can move. They have the best vision. They only move regularly like a king, but have the vision of both a queen, and a knight giving you important intelligence to be able to see more squares.
Finally the game is not won when you capture the enemy king. Real soldiers would not stop fighting if their general died. Instead it is a game of attrition where you must capture everything your opponent has on the board before victory is declared.
A draw happens if there is no possible ways for attrition to happen, (for example both sides only have pawns that are locked up left, or both sides only have opposite color bishops left) or if it is agreed, or for the 50 move rule.
The computer puts a question mark over every square you can not see automatically, and acts as the arbiter keeping both sides honest.
Thoughts?
