10 X 10 board

Say you wanted to make the board 10 X 10.

What moves would you make for the new pair of pieces?  Superknight could move up 3 and over 2.

Superpawn could move backwards, or maybe not be capturable

Limited bishops and rooks might only move 5 squares on a move

Any suggestions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capablanca_chess

And then years later

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_chess

Gee... that Capablanca game looks hard

Forking Hell!

inb4 Dvoretsky writes a book on this and blows everybody's brain out.

Does anyone know what it called with a 10x10 board with the normal setup in the centre ?

10x10 chess usually involves Jester piece.

I'm afraid a 10x10 board will screw up one of the most exicting thing of chess: the battle between knight and bishop. It's amazing how pieces so different can be perfectly balanced, their value depending on the position.

With a much bigger board (it's 100 squares instead of 64, don't forget the side is squared) the bishop will clearly be more valuable than the knight from the start. Good bye Nimzo indian, or Ruy Lopez exchange, etc.

Don't think there is a name for such a variation, could be wrong though.

Actually, they are known as Fairy Pieces.

Holy crap the fool in omega chess advanced is scary. It emulates the last piece your opponent moved adds about 20 minutes a turn thinking time

Perhaps the most important consideration with 10x10 chess is that of gameplay and balance.  The single biggest problem I have with the most common fairy chess pieces, the rook/knight composite, and the bishop/knight composite, as used in grand chess, is that they are insanely powerful and are too far reaching for such a large board.  Futhermore, we must also consider that with an increase of board size the balance of power has shifted from the Knight to the Bishop.  Leaving a tactical hole which needs to be filled.

I would create as new unit called the "Steward".  It can only move one square in any orthogonal direction (forward, back, left or right); but like the Pawn it can move two squares forward on its first move.  It is therefore capable of (and subject to) en'pasent  capture.  Whether it be with Pawn or Steward.  The Steward is able to capture on any diagonal for a distance of two squares.

As such the Steward is the perfect counter-point to the Knight.  Equal in both scope and function.  Where the Knight is modelled on the highly mobile cavalry soldier.  The Steward is modelled on the Pikeman.  It is less mobile, but, better able to operate within the Pawn structure - and just as lethal in close quarters.

I would set up the board with the white pieces positioned as follows: 10 Pawns (a2-c2, d3-g3, h2-j2), 4 Stewards (d2-g2), 4 Knights (b1, c1, h1 and i1), 2 Bishops (d1, g1), 2 Rooks (a1,j1), 1 Queen (e1) and 1 King (f1).  Black should have a similar number of pieces in a mirrored arrangement.

Hello all maybe you would be interested in taking a little look ay simchess. I would love to hear your opinions.

Welcome!

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess960-chess-variants/waterloo?lc=1#last_comment

A 4+3 "knight" would be an interesting balance to the advantaged bishop.   Also a "king's guard" might be an interesting piece: it moves like a king but it can only be taken if forced more than x squares from the king. 

2 queens?

Of course you don't have to limit yourself to 2 new pieces on 10x10: there is room enough to have each player start with 3 filled ranks. E.g. 10 Pawns plus 20 pieces. It is actually better to start the Pawns on 3rd rank on such a board, or you get back the problem of boring and tedious opening play that plagued the precursors of modern Chess before the invention of the double push. Even if it would mean leaving part of the 1st and 2nd rank empty. (An alternative is to add an initial triple push to the Paws.)

The only 10x10 variant I ever designed is Elven Chess; it has 4 new piece types. These move as King (non-royal), King+Bishop, King+Rook or 'double King' (i.e. a piece that can make up to two independent King moves per turn, even if they are both captures).

The non-royal King offers extra trading partners for the minors. The King+Bishop and King+Rook piece are somewhat less overpowering than the Capablanca pieces, because they only get 4 extra moves (compared to R or B) instead of 8. (Of course this is then offset by the overwhelmingly strong double-mover, which is worth Q+R.)

https://guardianchess.com

try this version of 10*10 and tell us your feedback

this is the setup capablanca and lasker settled upon when they played it. they advised it replace chess because the game was played out. we agree, and it's all we really play around here. 8x10 makes for battle with pawns. 10x10 the pawns become weird, and it takes forever for the knights to get anywhere. the extra bishop also moves like knight and extra rook also moves like knight. just used a piece of sanded plywood scrap and painted it up in a day. enjoy

Have you tried adding a couple of "Ferz" pieces to create the most generic and laziest grand chess variant ever? You can put them alongside King and Queen pieces like "Bodyguards" in Hiashatar, but their limited movement retained from Shatranj forces you to use them almost like "councellors" in Xiangqi, but lets you reserve the castling as a desperation move.

Is there a website, where I can make a custom position on a 10x10 board?

If you want to play those against a simple AI you can use the Play-Test Applet.