Talk:Three-dimensional chess

Night Move

When you said that a night can move one cube rookwise then one bishoplike move it is possible for it to move through all 3 planes, ie, it moves one square forward, then one left, then one down. I sugest replacing that with it moves two cubes rookwise, then one cube rookwise in a perpendicular direction, thus meaning the entire move can take place on one plane, unless of course what can be interpreted from what is already written is true (moving through all 3 planes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by J4ck 7he Ripp3r (talk • contribs) 07:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the text "Rooks, bishops, and knights move as they do in Chess in any given plane" makes it clear that you can't do the knight move that would change three coordinates at once, but you're right that the rook-step plus bishop-step description is flawed (and in multiple ways). I've replaced that text by describing it as a (0,1,2) leap. I didn't try to explain that further; hopefully the context will make it clear to anybody familiar with standard chess. 76.202.61.191 (talk) 01:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

3D chess non-existent?

Did you mean non-existent? And if so, that's not really true... if people have made up the rules for it and built boards for it, it's real. -- Wapcaplet

But I mean, can we really play 3d chess now? Don't we need some kind of equipments that we don't have now? -- Taku 17:43 14 May 2003 (UTC)

Yes, it is actually possible to play star trek 3D chess! Look at the sites I've inserted on the wikipage of Three-dimensional chess: there are also instructions on how to build a chessboard! :-) Marco

Also, there is a very active 3D email chess club at Yahoogroups playing the Millennium 3D Chess* variant which uses three standard 8 by 8 chess boards. Go to http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Millennium_3D_Chess/ or visit the Millennium 3D Chess* home page at http://www.geocities.com/william_dagostino/ --Will 20 June 2006

ST vs Ginga Eiyu densetsu 3D chess

Takuya, are you sure that the 3d chess variant played in Ginga Eiyu densetsu is the same as the one played in Star Trek? -- Derek Ross 17:31 14 May 2003 (UTC)

I am not sure. I will clarify it in the article. -- Taku 17:43 14 May 2003 (UTC)

ST Tri-D Chess NOT 3D chess proper; definition of latter

I believe that Star Trek chess is NOT 3-d chess, rather, it is normal chess, on a normal board, with the only difference being that different parts of the board are at different elevations. Ive seen nothing on Star Trek to indicate that the rules are different, only the appearance of the board is different. Pizza Puzzle

This sounds to be about right. To dimensionalize the chess game you need to put ANOTHER board of the same size (8x8) over or under the original game itself. Also the original rules need to be kept in place. This is what has been done at rules for 2 or more boards. This gives those who think it is to difficult to play on a 3-D board a chance to try it out. It is also a stepping stone to more boards as the mind begins to analize more than one board.--Paul 20:35, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This is how 3Dc(broken link) works. You have three 8x8 boards stacked vertically. The middle board plays like normal chess, but the upper and lower boards have additional pieces which can move between the boards. --Darac Marjal 21:29, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I guess the ST scriptwriters thought of Tri-D chess being three-dimensional by the feature of its three vertical boards (plus the extra 'attack boards'). If not, they certainly got away with it by calling the game Tri-Dimensional instead of three-dimensional, didn't they? :-) I'd say the Tri-D chess material is a relevant part of the article. One might make it more precise by mentioning the above. --Wernher 20:56, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Tri-D Chess isn't a three-dimensional chess unless a piece can move directly upwards and downwards in addition to all other movements. The Tri-D Chess in Star Trek has boards at different levels, but it does not qualify as a Three-dimensional chess. Should we remove it?

O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 22:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Tri-D chess is not pure 3-D chess - but neither is it pure 2-D chess. It's somewhere in the middle. The real question is whether or not Tri-D chess is worthy of a stand-alone article. If not, then I think it should stay here. Although not strictly 3-D in nature, it is more widely known as "3-D Chess" than "Tri-D Chess" so this is where people would expect to find it. --Macduff (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Anyone know where a copy of the 3Dc chess rules can be found? How about a set? User:Green Herring

Hello - you are thinking this out too much. The Original Series prop makers used existing plastic checkers and 3D chess sets on the market, with which to create the boards on the metal frame mount. What you need to know is the rules as they exist today in general, are the black (top) board front two rows overlap the back two rows of the neutral (center) board, and the white (bottom) board backmost two rows overlap the front two rows of the neutral (center) board. When pieces on the board move, and where there is overlap, the pieces can also be moved to the upper or lower level square, from the square they land on during movement. Some similarities for the four (or sometimes more) attack boards. Additionally the upper, middle and lower boards are not normal chess boards, but are 4x4 squares each in dimension, with the smaller attack boards being 2x2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.126.38.206 (talk) 20:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Asimov story with 3D chess

The Asimov story with 3D chess was actually A Perfect Fit. Pebble In The Sky had a normal chess game - Asimov deliberately used a real game and gave all the moves in the story because he didn't like typical fictional descriptions of chess games. Ekaterin 12:32, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dragon Chess

I just wanted to point out that Dragon Chess should be mentioned as well. Actually when I read the article on Dragon Chess I came here to find out which was first, Star Trek Chess or Dragon Chess. The concept behind both is nearly identical, by the description of how it looks anyway.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Request to remove Matrix chess from the artical

It doesn't seam to be noteworthy enough to have a whole section written about it, at the very least it should be split into a seperate artical. Its also written like an advertisement. Im going to remove it, if anyone objects feel free to tell me Googolplexed (talk) 04:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Terribly written...

The description of the unicorns is incomprehensible, and the layout of Asimov's hyperchess isn't much better (the typo that says "type 3 is like type 3" doesn't help). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.86.70 (talk) 09:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

    I agree the Asimov versions are not well-defined - but I see the exact paragraphs on other sites. Problem is, to be very symmetrical, with a (lone)king in the center, the board needs to be 7x7 or 9x9, sometimes 11x11 to fit the pieces as described. I've put together an 8 level board using Stratos chess sets, am trying to figure out how to implement as near to these descriptions as possible. Maybe the book (I have on order) will have a more accurate description; it sounds like the Roseate formation is maybe the only one given by Asimov - apparently he made a simple math mistake! (can't fit 9 rows of pieces on an 8x8 board!!)Chesshacker (talk) 02:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Star trek chessboard

I drew ST Chessboard with google SketchUp. If someone want to improve actual design please contact me I'll send by mail actual skp file. OTAVIO1981 (talk) 19:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)