Game: Hnefatafl

Thread: Re: The Tafl Gild

whac3 — 2008-09-28T23:01:09+00:00

Why don't we create this as an actual guild here on BGG? I'd join.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl - chesslike Norse game that died with good reason

docreason — 2008-09-09T00:42:49+00:00

I find Surprise Attack! an interesting variant on the original game.

Image

Groomporter — 2008-09-04T12:39:15+00:00

An oak tafl game with deer toe bones as the game pieces from Macgregor Historic Games

Image

Groomporter — 2008-08-26T13:26:34+00:00

A combination Tablut and Chess board by MacGregor Historic Games

Image

Groomporter — 2008-08-25T19:38:52+00:00

A coffee table Tafl set with pawns and a king from the Isle of Lewis Chessmen as the pieces by MacGregor Historic Games

Image

Groomporter — 2008-08-25T18:51:18+00:00

An oak "Fidchell" game inspired by the 10th C. Irish Ballinderry Game Board, by MacGregor Historic Games

Image

Groomporter — 2008-08-25T18:27:40+00:00

A fabric "fidchell" or Brandhu game with art based on the Irish Ballinderry game board by MacGregor Historic Games

Image

Groomporter — 2008-08-25T18:25:36+00:00

An oak Tafl set with simulated bone piece by MacGregor Historic Games

Thread: Hnefatafl in the world media

ddyer — 2008-08-18T19:53:51+00:00

Hnefatafl made a cameo appearance in the world media today, with stories about a tournament held on the tiny island Fetlar, one of the Shetland Islands.
http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/news_08_2008/Wendy%20crowned%...

Apparently the "viking" angle tickled the fancy of the BBC, so stories appeared in the BBC online

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/75650...

and an audio story on "The World" www.theworld.org featured Fetlar as the answer to their daily geo-quiz.

http://theworld.org/taxonomy_by_date/3/20080818

Among other things, you can hear someone say "Hnefatafl". I've
always wondered how it would be pronounced.

Image

artyomch — 2008-08-13T15:41:58+00:00

Hnefatafl on igGameCenter

Thread: Re: The Viking warriors game

lengthtoavoid — 2008-08-02T01:26:48+00:00

I just got Papillon's Escape, which is a UK variation of "viking chess". I think the concept is extremely challenging and worth playing out. Of course it is hard to get the king out....

Thread: Re: The Viking warriors game

docreason — 2008-08-01T22:42:39+00:00

I will do a plug here and say that Surprise Attack! is an interesting reworking of the game.

Thread: The Viking warriors game

coyotelaughs — 2008-08-01T20:03:17+00:00

A review of Hneftafl: An abstract game played by the Norseman “Vikings” as well as the other Scandinavian countries and also the Saxons.

I can play at Tafl,
Nine skills I know,
Rarely forget I the runes,
I know of books and smithing,
I know how to slide on skis,
Shoot and row, well enough;
Each of two arts I know,
Harp-playing and speaking poetry.
-Earl Rognvaldr Kali

So what’s the history behind this one? Or is this thing old?

Hneftafl: The Hnef means “King” in Old Norse and Tafl which means ”table” in the same language so in effect the games English equivalent would be kings table and it appears to be the only strategy game played by the Saxons until the introduction of Chess. As Chess and its pieces are referenced in modern literature so was Hneftafl in the scandanavian cultures. And you can find reference to the game in such differencing pieces of Norse literature as the Poetic Edda , Orkneyinga Saga, the Greenland Lay of Atli, Hervarar Saga, and the Fridthjof's Saga. It was considered the game of warriors and all lads were taught it as a means of learning tactics and strategy. So who ever said board games were a pointless hobby didn’t discuss it with the Vikings or if they did the didn’t live to say it again

What the game about?

]]>

Hneftafl is a game played on either an 11 x 11 board or a 13 X 13 board depending on the skill level of the people playing. It and all of its variants are an asymmetrical strategy games composed of two uneven signs. On the white side we have the King in the center on the throne square, a square that only he can enter(on the 13x13 board, on the 11X11 board there is not throne square) and his 12 guards,4 on each side of the king and on the black side we have the 24 barbarians 6 on each side of the board.

So how do you win?

The goal of the game is different for each side. On the Kings side the goal is to get the king to the edge of the board so that he can escape or to the corner of the board if you are playing the smaller board. And on the Barbarian side the goal is to capture the king or make it so the only spot the king can move to is back to the throne square.

So how is it played?

All pieces move like a rook in chess i.e orthogonally in any directions. And each player takes a turn moving 1 and only 1 piece as many spaces as he would like. You can capture other pieces by sandwhiching them between two of your pieces. The only rule being that you must of moved to the capture. I.e. you don’t get a free capture if an opponents piece moves between two of yours.
]]>

Since this an asymmetrical game the common practice is to switch sides after a game and play again. The winner being the person who won both or won as the king if still tied then the person who captured the most opponent would win.

You said there variants what are they?

The main variations of the rules are as follows. Either an 11X11 board or a 13X13 board. Either the king must make it to the corner of the board or make it to the edge. There is also a variant that has become a completely different game and that is

Alea evangelii
]]> (which means game of the gospels)

And is played on a GO board. It is played on the intersection of the lines and is said to represent a naval battle. The goals are the same but the set up is completely different. This is the Saxon version of the game and if you ever want to burn your brain completely this is the game to play. See complete rules for it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alea_evangelii_%28game%29

And Finally. What is my opinion of the game?

To be honest I think Hneftafl is a very good abstract that requires a lot more skill then you would think with its very simple rule set but it is not as good as its variant Alea evangelii.

Allea_Evangelii on the other hand is a game everyone should play but you really should at least be decent at Hnefatfal before you give it a go cause its gonna destroy your brain.

Ohh wait I forgot Just as a small side note:
• A novice player in the role of white will generally win versus a novice player in the role of black.
• An expert player in the role of white will generally lose versus an expert player in the role of black.

Image

swuyau — 2008-05-25T11:41:34+00:00

Component

Image

Eric Haas — 2008-04-04T03:11:12+00:00

A Hnefatafl set on display at Clontarf 1014 in Havre de Grace, Maryland.

Image

rseater — 2008-01-08T00:49:26+00:00

A replica of an ancient Viking playing piece.

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

Bwian — 2007-11-27T20:27:28+00:00

jaredhayter wrote:
Variations in game play are probably the combined result of regional variations in play and the lack of a written record of the exact rules. Like most traditional games there has been throughout history and assumption that people already know how to play or learn from an experienced opponent. If you think about it, chess also has both problems. Most chess sets do not come with written rules because it is understood that the buyer will already know how to play while at the same time there exist many regional variants of the game. If chess had fallen out of prominence before the arrival of the printing press I think we might find it as difficult to reconcstruct the rules as it has been for the Tafl games.

I don't disagree. But now that we have printing presses we could standardize the rules, and doing so would help the game. As it is, people play, decide one side is unbalanced, find one of the variant rules to "even things out", and say the stupid game is broken. If there were one set of standard rules, it's much harder to say that the game is broken, and easier to admit that you haven't figured it out yet. (Unless the standard rules give a broken game, of course... ) Local variants might exist, but as with chess, there would be one set of internationally recognized rules to act as a baseline. (There is a set of internationally recognized rules for chess, isn't there? I don't actually follow chess that much.)

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

jaredhayter — 2007-11-27T18:17:29+00:00

Variations in game play are probably the combined result of regional variations in play and the lack of a written record of the exact rules. Like most traditional games there has been throughout history and assumption that people already know how to play or learn from an experienced opponent. If you think about it, chess also has both problems. Most chess sets do not come with written rules because it is understood that the buyer will already know how to play while at the same time there exist many regional variants of the game. If chess had fallen out of prominence before the arrival of the printing press I think we might find it as difficult to reconcstruct the rules as it has been for the Tafl games.

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

ddyer — 2007-11-27T00:12:59+00:00

You can play online against real opponents or a decent robot
player at http://www.boardspace.net/english/about_tablut.html

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

Bwian — 2007-11-26T23:32:25+00:00

ryanmaesen wrote:
I wish this game had more of a spotlight. It's such a simple game that can become the biggest brain burner in the bunch. For such an unknown, underratted game, this one never collects dust. This game has very little negitive things to say about it.

I think one reason is that the rules seem to morph as you watch them. I've seen rules that say the victory condition is to get to the edges, not the corners. I've seen special exceptions for capturing the King against an edge, or for moving through the center square. These rules can vastly skew the game to one player or another, and so people give up on the game. (And some of the changes probably make sense at one point in the learning curve, but not others: a problem with assymmetric games.) I don't think this game has any chance as long as the rules are so poorly codified.

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

ryanmaesen — 2007-11-26T22:56:22+00:00

I could be wrong on the dates. The inside of the box states 400 b.c. and I was just going by that. Thank you for the correction.

Thread: Re: Most underrated game!!

whac3 — 2007-11-26T22:49:58+00:00

Your history is not entirely correct as the Viking period of Scandinavian history started only c700 C.E., not B.C.E., butthis IS a good game. I did not know it had been re-issued and have always just played it on a chess-board.

Thread: Most underrated game!!

ryanmaesen — 2007-11-26T20:05:14+00:00

Hnefatafl
( I never know if I'm pronouncing it correctly )

My girlfriend surprised me with this game not too long ago. It's a simple game to learn but incredibly difficult to master. It pre-dates chess. Created by the Vikings in around 400 bc, it's a fun strategy game that challenges your survival skills. I've had some amazing wars with my girlfriend and look forward to sharing this game with friends. This game definantly needs to be experienced! Fight to kill the King by "sandwiching" your enemies, or switch sides and try to get your King off the battlefield to safety. Easily one of my new top 10 games!! Hnefatafl is also know as Talf, Kings Table, and The Viking Game. Check it out!! I think you'll love it!

Out of the Box
I think this game looks a little too simple for people to be intrigued. It comes in a simple box and small wooden pieces. Nothing flashy about this game. There isn't any "awesome" art work to draw you in. There are some nice designs on the cloth board, but that's about it. This game is all about the game play. It may seem simple at first, but I think it can be just as challenging as chess. And that's why Hnefatafl gets my vote as Most Underrated Game.

Gameplay
It's a simple game really. Moving orthoganally, try to place one of your pieces on either side of your opponent to "sandwich" them and kill that warrior. All the pices move the same (like rooks in chess). The game can move very fast or slow like chess. When I first played this game I made careless moves and played the game very quickly. Not smart. Take your time and think out all your moves.

Where it gets crazy
One player will be completly out numbered. One having 12 (plus their King), and the other having 24 warriors. The object is to get your King from the center of the board to one of the four corners of the board. The King and his tiny army are outnumbered and completly surrounded. You'll have to use timing and a little strategic luck to get out of this one.

Conclusion
I wish this game had more of a spotlight. It's such a simple game that can become the biggest brain burner in the bunch. For such an unknown, underratted game, this one never collects dust. This game has very little negitive things to say about it. It's tough to have a game dating back to 400 b.c. stack up against todays games. Small wooden pieces and a simple cloth board is all it takes, and surprisingly this game shines!

The obvious negitive
The peices look like stubby little penises

Note
I played this on a 11 x 11 board. There are other variations

Try playing online:
http://aagenielsen.dk/hnefatafl_online.html

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl - chesslike Norse game that died with good rea

gaspode — 2007-09-29T20:13:22+00:00

From my own experience and recolection of playing many types of tafl the game should really be played with each player playing both sides, a complete game consisting of two rounds.

Also, and I can only speak for the varients I have played, white only has the advantage when neither player is very experienced and that as players become more used to the game the advantage swings over to black.

Thread: Re: Points or spaces?

snigfarp — 2007-09-12T05:47:21+00:00

The game could be, and was, played on both points and spaces. There are 9x9, 11x11, 13x13 and 15x15 boards where play is in the spaces. There are also 7x7 and 19x19 boards with play on the intersections. A few boards, mostly 7x7, also use peg-holes which avoids the question.

Evidence for both types, in case you want to look into it further, are in the following finds and documents:

7x7 on intersections: boards from Downpatrick and Buckquoy.
7x7 on squares: board from Downpatrick (reverse).
9x9 on squares: tablut, board from Jarlshof (?).
11x11 on squares: tawlbwrdd, board from Trondheim.
13x13 on squares: boards from Gokstad and Bergen.
15x15 on squares: board from Coppergate (York).
19x19 on intersections: alea evangelii.

A suitably worded google search should bring up links for these, but let me know if you try any without success.

Thread: Re: Attackers win in The Viking Game

ryanmaesen — 2007-09-11T23:43:24+00:00

I've been playing some great all out wars with my girlfriend. I've been sneaking on here to look for some strategy that will help me pull out some secret surprise moves. I tried the blocking of the corners and it worked great! Although its a dirty move, I'll take what I can get.

I've also found that being on the defense as a defender works great. Let them come to me. And slowly work your men into a square. The king can move around safely inside the square. Wait for the time to strike and pick off the attackers one by one. Then when the time is right, get your king out to safety.

It's tough to build a strategy. Every time you try to carry out a plan it is usually foiled. And once your opponent has seen your "tricks" your probably gonna have to find a new strategy. Good luck and let me know if you've got any good tricks up your sleeves.

Thread: Points or spaces?

jaredhayter — 2007-09-11T14:33:04+00:00

I read on some website a claim that Hnefatafl was originally played on the points rather than the spaces. Is there any evidence for this claim? It would certainly be a departure from the way we currently make our boards but would make the game much more compatible with my 9x9 go boards (which can also be used to play 8x8 space games).

Thread: Love the Zombies Idea

jaredhayter — 2007-09-11T14:28:27+00:00

I love the zombies theme but I would consider changing the rules so that the zombies attackers are much more numerous but only move one square at a time while the survivors have the rook's move. How many zombies would be required to have a fair chance under such circumstances without making it impossible to escape? Perhaps you could balance things out by having the king also move slowly. The king piece could be a small child or someone similarly innocent and in need of protection.

Thread: Re: Alternate Hnefatafl Armies??

Talisinbear — 2007-09-03T02:27:32+00:00

how about Custer at Little Big Horn

The Magnificent Seven ?

The Alamo

Thread: The Tafl Gild

snigfarp — 2007-08-15T05:43:39+00:00

The tafl gild is a mailing list dedicated to discussion about hnefatafl. I don't run it, but I'm trying to help the list owner kick new life into it. I wondered if anyone on here would help us kickstart this thing by joining and adding to the discussions on there already? The web address is:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/taflgild/

Thread: Hnefatafl - chesslike Norse game that died with good reason

Radien — 2007-07-12T00:16:26+00:00

Hnefatafl was popular among the Norse before chess came around and stomped on it in terms of popularity. Many people would like to revisit these kinds of games, with the thought that cultural domination of one country over another would sometimes blot out some pretty worthwhile activities that were originally enjoyed by the locals.

I am sorry to say that this is sometimes not the case. Hnefatafl seems to be one of those times.

Hnefatafl, and the many variants of Tafl that go by different names, is a game where one player's objective is to guide the white king to an escape square, while black's is to surround and capture him (black plays without a king). An abstract game which depicts a very specific war scenario with unequal sides is a fun idea, but the way it is accomplished ends up being very longwinded and slow-moving.

Hnefatafl has one of the problems which you will find in the original chess rules: it's exceedingly hard to play offensively due to the limitations of the pieces. The two sides being unequal, white has the advantage. However, if black manages to gain the upperhand, there's a good chance that it will take a very long time to truly pound white into submission and capture his king. White can choose to prolong the game to great lengths, long after it has become all but impossible to win. All it takes for this scenario to occur is for black to move pieces into the empty areas surrounding each escape point.

Some oddities arise when dealing with pieces on the edge of the board, and various "band-aid" rules have been instated to determine what happens in these cases. However, some of them have odd side effects, such as making the king easier to capture than a regular piece in certain situations.

It is perfectly possible for skilled gamers to work out a good strategy for this game. However, the winning strategies of Hnefatafl are far less interesting than other abstract strategy games, and involve much less direct conflict. Tafl works much better as a decoration than a game for people to play. Among period medieval games, I recommend finding another alternative. Backgammon, for instance, is a medieval Norse game that has survived to this day, and for good reason: it's fun. There is also a medieval variation of the rules for Backgammon in case you are wanting to try something new (or, literally speaking, "old").

Thread: Hnefatafl Microbadge

snigfarp — 2007-06-17T19:13:16+00:00

Hnefatafl finally has its own microbadge. It's based on the game board depicted on the picture stone at Ockelbo church, in Sweden. You can see it under my avatar.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl booklet in draft

snigfarp — 2007-06-15T05:20:33+00:00

Fenway5 wrote:
I very much appreciate all of your effort and time in researching and presenting information on this brilliant game! Here's a little Geek Gold for all your efforts! Thank you again!

Thank you , I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl booklet in draft

Fenway5 — 2007-06-15T02:11:57+00:00

I very much appreciate all of your effort and time in researching and presenting information on this brilliant game! Here's a little Geek Gold for all your efforts! Thank you again!

Cheers!
Christopher

Thread: Re: Alternate Hnefatafl Armies??

snigfarp — 2007-06-06T19:52:35+00:00

You might be interested in the following thread, in which a few ideas were discussed:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/73624

If I were to do a Tolkien themed game, I'd probably go for a 9 against 16 game set in Moria, when the Fellowship were trapped by a horde of orcs in Balin's tomb or whatever room it was.

Thread: Alternate Hnefatafl Armies??

Fenway5 — 2007-06-05T20:20:41+00:00

Hello,

I did a homemade LOTR set (19x19 board army size) with Theoden and Rohan troops versus Orcs...sort of a Helm's Deep Hnefatafl. Very Tolkien-rific!

I prefer playing on the large board as it feels more like armies and a king escaping. It certainly gets my non gaming friends interested in having a go!

Now I am thinking of alternate army sets to build using 15mm size troops like:

King Arthur vs. the Saxons

Spartans vs. Persians

Romans vs Barbarians

Agincourt English vs. French

Are there any other famous battles or ancient conflicts which you think might lend itslef to Hnefatafl idea?

Cheers!
Christopher

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

snigfarp — 2007-05-29T19:56:44+00:00

I think edge-winning variants are possible for just about any size of board, but you need to think on the number of pieces, as well as making slight rule changes from one size to another. In particular I think your 13x13 board with 37 pieces will probably never work as an edge-winning game.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-05-28T18:17:09+00:00

I think that experiments like these are the key to drawing down the variants to a few that are balanced for attacker and defender. I personally like edge escape variants as they keep a high degree of urgency on the attacker side, and eliminating the double lines at least forces the defenders to stand and fight a little and make their own way out (as opposed to using an existing double escape). I will keep playing through your vatiant boards with my friend if we can get our minds off playing Viktory II for the next few days... (!)

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

snigfarp — 2007-05-28T05:38:51+00:00

I've tried playing as the attackers on the Toftanes I board, with all the other settings left as standard. It took me a while, but I managed to get the "invincible" configuration, with three attackers slantwise across each corner:

1. M9-M11 F7-F11
2. A9-A11 G9-L9
3. G12-L12 J7-J2
4. L7-L2 D7-D13
5. B7-B12 J2-J1
6. M5-M3 G4-G3
7. G2-B2 G3-A3
8. E1-C1 G10-C10
9. I13-K13 F11-K11
10. F1-F2 I7-I11
11. B2-A2 A3-B3
12. A2-A3 B3-B2
13. A3-A2 B2-B3
14. A5-A3 B3-B4
15. A2-B2 G6-E6
16. F2-K2 J1-K1
17. K2-I2 E6-F6
18. I1-J1 K1-K9
19. J1-K1 I11-I6
20. H13-H12 F6-F10
21. H12-C12 D13-C13
22. C12-E12 K9-J9
23. E13-D13 C13-C11
24. D13-C13 G5-G3

I'm a bit out of practice with this technique, which I've so far only played on the 11x11 board. Usually I get here in far fewer moves. It could mean that this game, like the 11x11 with the same rules, is a win for the attackers, if there is no way to actually prevent them from getting to this configuration. I haven't time at the moment to complete the game and close in on the defenders.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-05-26T13:54:28+00:00

Well, I have cracked out the old Hnefatafl board as my university buddy is out visiting me in Sri Lanka. We've been playing and playing a strange variation on Trondheim-1 on the 13x13 board, and it oddly enough feels extremely balanced. The Muscovites started winning right off the bat (very clearly showing the strength of having the doubles closed right off the bat). However, the defender regained ascendancy through intelligent screening and planned sacrifices. It's also interesting to note that the way the attackers are already in contact with the defenders makes the game stickier faster... early captures feel more possible - bit are typically never good for the attackers!

I think I have reinforced the idea that variants with open double-escapes on set up should be played to the corners, and variants without double escape routes on setup should be played to the edge. This Trondheim-1 variant variation seems a nice balance. I'd like to find a good, balanced variant setup on the 13x13, and so far this fits the bill. There will be more games tonight!!

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

snigfarp — 2007-04-29T22:08:10+00:00

I'm glad you like the applet. I forgot to mention that the computer player is quite weak with the bigger board sizes. You can compensate for this by increasing the minimum depth and/or minimum time settings. But if you increase minimum depth even to 2, prepare to find something else to do between turns. Increasing the minimum time to the maximum you're prepare to wait might be a better option.

I have to be careful what I do to the AI, as it needs to operate with whatever size of board and combination of rules the player chooses; I don't want to have to write dozens of separate AIs for the dozens of combinations. But I realise that it's not much good at all at the moment. It fails utterly on games where the pieces move only to adjacent spaces.

At the moment, the three criteria it uses, in order of priority are: i. does this move win me the game; ii. does this move win/lose a piece; and iii. does this move give me full control of a row/column (i.e. having the only piece on a row/column, or occupying the two outermost positions on it). There are other criteria I'd like to add in, such as how much freedom of movement the king (or the entire army) has, but I need to make sure I get the priority right.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-04-28T18:20:49+00:00

With a move from the centre, an attacker focus on capture leads to a rapid endgame!

1. H13-H11 G8-B8
2. M8-C8xB8 G7-G8
3. I13-I8 G9-I9xI8
4. H11-H8 I9-H9xH8
5. B7-B8 G8-M8++

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-04-28T18:15:11+00:00

(here's the record of the game)
1. G12-K12 J7-K7
2. G2-J2 G5-J5
3. E1-E3 K7-K3
4. A5-H5 G4-M4
5. B7-B4 D7-D2
6. M6-L6 D2-A2
7. E13-C13 G10-B10
8. M9-M11 H7-H11
9. I13-I9 E7-E5
10. A6-D6 B10-B12
11. A8-E8 H11-E11
12. A7-E7 E5-C5
13. H5-H7 J5-J7
14. H1-H4 G9-D9
15. D6-D7 G8-G11
16. M8-G8 G11-I11
17. M5-F5 I11-I13
18. G1-G5 C5-C8
19. F5-F6 I7-I5
20. H4-H6xG6 F7-F8
21. E7-F7 G7-G6
22. F13-F9xF8 J7-J5
23. J2-H2 J5-J1
24. H2-H5 A2-A7
25. F1-F5 J1-L1
26. G5-G4 B12-F12
27. G4-G5xG6++

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-04-28T18:11:31+00:00

That's a great little applet. I tried a game and I noted your defenders start by moving from the outside. Two defenders moving straight from the inside directly against one attacker formation opens two double lanes and captures an attacker. This is easily blocked, but loses the attacker a couple strategic moves to make up for the blocking, and allows the defender to free up his king early. I will try this as a defender and see how the system reacts!

Thanks for the positive comments!

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

snigfarp — 2007-04-27T19:08:37+00:00

I've updated my tafl applet at http://tafl.snigfarp.karoo.net/ to play your version of the game. I didn't have the right board layout before. All the other options were already there, though. The settings are these:

Objective: Edge
Castle: Exclusive; King capture: Enclosure, Weaponless
Movement: Unlimited
Layout: Toftanes I; First move: Attacker

Your rule 4 above is entirely appropriate. Only the king should be captured against the centre square. The only reason I can think of for complicating the rules with capture against squares, is to stop a piece resting invincible beside them. An ordinary defender or attacker beside the central square can be captured in the normal way, without the square being hostile.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl booklet in draft

Sexy Amy — 2007-04-27T19:06:06+00:00

Downloaded your file.

Wow ! It looks great. Hope to read it in detail tonight.

Thanks for doing this. I've always been interested in these games.

Thread: Hnefatafl booklet in draft

snigfarp — 2007-04-27T18:42:58+00:00

After about four years researching a book about hnefatafl, I still haven't got a book written. I have, however, been writing a smaller scale booklet, an illustrated collection of articles, with proposals for reconstruction of various different historical games, with the reasoning behind them. I've put a draft up on the Links section of my hnefatafl web site:

http://tafl.snigfarp.karoo.net/tafl/

It's the bottom link on the page. It's a PDF, about 1.2 megabytes in size. It's designed to be printed onto both sides of A4 paper, which can then be folded into an A5 booklet of 48 pages. The four articles I've put it in are: Reconstructing a Game for the Ballinderry Board; Reconstructing the Alea Evangelii; Reconstructing Tawlbwrdd; Reconstructing Tablut.

I hope someone finds it useful.

Thread: Re: Hnefatafl: The way we play

snigfarp — 2007-04-27T18:34:25+00:00

Excellent article. The strategic advice holds for just about any variant of hnefatafl, too. I am surprised, though, that the 13x13 board with just 37 pieces gives a balanced game, especially if you play to have the king reach the edge, and be captured by enclosure. Normally I'd put 49 pieces on that board with the same rules, but I'll have to give 37 a try to see how it works for me.

Thread: Hnefatafl: The way we play

dnjkirk — 2007-04-21T04:59:41+00:00

Hnefatafl was my most-played game throughout university. This is because I made an easily-portable fabric board which could be (and was) set up anywhere. A friend of mine and I would sit down and play whenever we had spare time, and discussion about strategy and tactics was incessant.

Now, I play with what seems to be an unusual variant when compared to what I have seen here on the Geek. My board is 13x13, Muscovites (the blockers) are laid out in groups of 6 per the typical "T" arrangement, but the Norsemen are arranged in four straight lines of three, radiating from the King's square. The variant rules are:
1) King cannot capture
2) King must be surrounded by 4 enemies
3) King escapes to edge
For some reason, we also applied the following rule, though I do not know where it came from:
4) no capture of any piece but the King against the King's square
This allows for the Muscovites to get stuck in if the Norsemen should open their middle too much without moving the King.

For all intents and purposes, I felt that this ruleset was very balanced, and while it seems the Norsemen have an advantage, this is not the case.

Each side has its own strategy as each side has its own goals. There are mistakes that new players make often due to the peculiarities of each force, and there are ways you should "think" in order to be most effective with the force you have chosen. They must therefore be treated differently:

Norse
Fundamentals: The main consideration with the Norsemen is escape. At all times you should search for double lanes, or double lanes to double lanes. A double lane is a path clear from enemies that leads, on both ends, to the edge of the board. Access to a double lane in one move should, in my opinion, be declared to new players just as one would say "check" in Chess or "atari" in Go. This is the prime threat a Norse player can use against the Muscovite, as it forces the Muscovite to break his strategic movement and respond to an imminent threat.

Mistakes: A common preoccupation with beginning Norse players is that, since they have fewer pieces than their adversary, they must preserve them. They might also think that it is necessary to mount a decisive enough defence in one part of the board that the Muscovites cannot block an escape due to the attrition. Neither of these are functional ideas, and I'll tell you why in two pithy one-liners:

1) if you didn't have all those troops around you in the first place, you'd win in two moves
Your troops are expendable. They are in your way. Sacrifice them if it means opening a route to victory. Don't think about saving troops, think about moving the King.

2) attrition didn't work at Sedan, and it won't work here
A dedicated defence, or a policy of attrition, will only work against inexperienced players. If you are setting up what my friend and I called a "bump and grind" - a series of loosely placed pieces that can all assist one another in capture when enemies enter their area - you are wasting time you could be pushing open a route to victory.

Keys: The threat of escape is what forces your opponent to move his pieces. You seek to force him to commit his pieces to a region of the board where they will be useless when you reveal your REAL escape route. Monty, paraphrased, said:
You must have an imaginative plan, Monty reasoned, and it must be a sound plan. ... Then you must stick to your plan…till you make the enemy react to your strategy…force him to commit his reserves, then you have the upper hand in the initiative…make him dance to your tune. Your plan must be flexible enough to counter uncertainties, but you must adhere to your basic intention.
Always keep escape in your mind, but manoeuver your opponent so that he cannot react to the escape you actually intend to make. Keep enough pressure on him by moving your King, and forcing him to block exits he doesn't want to have to block. When he has committed his reserves (i.e., put too many pieces on one side of the board), shift to the other and sacrifice anything to reach the edge.

Muscovites
Fundamentals: Whereas the sole intent of the Norse King must be escape, you must be singleminded in your encirclement. The main preoccupation will be double lanes, and if there is no immediate threat of escape, move a piece to sit on a lane that is empty. Your opening should be methodical, your demeanour should be calm: you must slowly strangle off all hope of escape while dealing with emerging threats thereof. Do not be drawn into a fight, and do not close unnecessarily with the opponent's pieces. I make a silent rule never to approach a Norse piece any closer than one space away. Approaching to the point of being adjacent not only loses your piece, but the missing piece creates an unsightly hole in your defence.

Mistakes: The Norseman makes a mistake by preserving his men at all costs; the Muscovite makes a mistake by thinking he has enough men to spare in a frontal assault. You need more pieces because you need to cover more space. Do not get drawn into fights. Even capture itself can be counter-productive: a removed Norse piece is just as big a hole in the defence as a removed Muscovite. You should actually try to keep the board cluttered, and look to the possible exits - and shut them. Whereas it seems the Muscovite can afford to waste pieces, this is simply untrue. Aggressive is not the way to play!

Keys: A constant eye for possible escapes is but the first step, prioritizing and blocking them the second. Choose the most at-risk escape routes. Put pieces on the double lanes. Block single lanes after this. If you've gotten that far without major threat, close in and choke the King to death. Slow, methodical, and planned are the ways to run a Muscovite strategy, and you must not allow the Norse to draw yo off your wicket.

Summary
Hnefatafl presents a deliciously mature strategy in a very simple and easy-to-digest package. The fact that you must always force yourself to fight towards the strategy and not get absorbed by the tactics is a constant challenge - not simply against your opponent, but against yourself. Since movement is so simple, it is easy to try to play lightning Tafl without thinking of strategic consequences. This is, however, precisely how to lose the game! Stick to your strategy, and do your best to get your opponent lost in tactics, and you will win. This is what makes Tafl something I will always return to.

Thread: Re: the official rules

snigfarp — 2007-04-10T00:05:13+00:00

I've found that allowing the flagship to capture complements the rule whereby the flagship can be captured as a normal piece, though Robert ap Ifan's 1587 passage on tawlbwrdd implies that the traditional rules were otherwise. A captureless flagship works best where the king wins on reaching the edge and is himself captured on all four sides.

If there were one addition that I would make to the options it would be to set who goes first. Unfortunately this rule isn't standardised, and different popular variants have adopted different options.

Thread: Re: the official rules

ddyer — 2007-04-09T17:48:56+00:00

Thothmaatre wrote:
I have tried the 11x11 on Citizen Dyer's excellent site Boardspace.net, but it seems easy for the non-flagship side (the silver tokens in that format)and awful brutal to the non-flagship side (gold). It is all too easy to slowly engulf the gold pieces and not allow an escape, leading to an inevitable Cannae like surrounding.

I agree the capture-less flagship is awfully weak. The implementation
at boardspace is set up so you can try other variations to balance
the game. Perhaps the "flagship can capture" state ought to be true
by default.

Thread: Re: the official rules

ddyer — 2007-04-09T17:45:45+00:00

Thothmaatre wrote:

BTW, Citizen Dyer, when the bot is completely surrounded with no moves left there is a javaScript error that says "best move determined" and locks up.

Philip

Yes, I saw that in the logs and fixed it yesterday. It's now a
loss for the bot.

Thread: Re: the official rules

Thothmaatre — 2007-04-09T17:20:50+00:00

I have tried the 11x11 on Citizen Dyer's excellent site Boardnet, but it seems easy for the non-flagship side (the silver tokens in that format)and awful brutal to the non-flagship side (gold). It is all too easy to slowly engulf the gold pieces and not allow an escape, leading to an inevitable Cannae like surrounding.

BTW, Citizen Dyer, when the bot is completely surrounded with no moves left there is a javaScript error that says "best move determined" and locks up.

Philip

Thread: play realtime at Boardspace.net

ddyer — 2007-03-21T07:41:27+00:00

Just released - you early adopters can check it out.
The game at http://www.boardspace.net/ can be 7x7 9x9 or 11x11.
The setup and rules default to the classic Tablut
"cross" formation, but you can rearrange the fleets
and add or remove pieces before play starts. There
is a competant robot player for the standard setup,
but you can definitely take advantage of it in the
rearrangement" phase.

Thread: Re: 5x5 variant?

jaredhayter — 2007-03-18T22:37:06+00:00

Thanks for your suggestions. My biggest reason for using the smaller board is simply that a smaller board and fewer pieces would be needed and the game would therefore be cheaper to make and faster to play. I just need a few more plays to come to understand the game a little better. Considering there have been so many variations in existence I did feel it was safe to do a little tweaking. My biggest gripe with pins against the throne and the corners is just that they are difficult to describe concisely. I understand why such rules are necessary but they seem to almost double the number of rules to the game.

Thread: Re: 5x5 variant?

snigfarp — 2007-03-18T20:05:38+00:00

I don't think that there's a simpler way that works. If you can't use the corners to capture against, they can be easily blocked by eight pieces. Although the attacker can't leave the pieces there (as he's got to move something in his turn) it wouldn't be difficult to choose carefully which of the eight pieces to move, only to move it back again on the next turn.

If you treat the corners as normal squares, then they can be blocked by four attackers, who then become invincible. The rules as I have them were as simple as I could get them while still having a balanced game.

If you want a simple but balanced hnefatafl game, and if it doesn't have to be brandub, then the best combination I've seen is a board of 9x9 (with 25 pieces) or 11x11 (with 37), the king is captured as in brandub, he must reach the edge and there are no special squares. Having the king captured as other pieces, with no throne to hide behind, really does make a difference. I think I've posted the full settings on a geeklist under the name tawlbwrdd.

Thread: Playing Brandub Ballinderry I

jaredhayter — 2007-03-18T17:29:10+00:00

Yesterday being St. patrick's Day I thought it would be appropriate to introduce the game of Irish Chess to my friends. Using a simple board I drew onto felt and colored glass stones as pieces, we used your Ballinderry I configuration with custodial capture of an armed king who must escape to the corner. I had made a mistake in describing the state of the throne which I should have left normal but I described the king as being uncapturable until he stepped off the throne. I found this made the king's position far too comfortable since no defenders were needed to keep him safe as long as he remained seated and he therefore only needed to wait for an opening and make it to the corner in two moves.

My inability to express the rules as concisely as possible made it difficult to teach to new players. With that in mind I would in the future strive to use a rules set that has the fewest special cases even if that leads to a lopsided game. Any special rules for the throne seem to complicate matters. I wish I had left this square unmarked but I marked my throne and corners with an X as you do on your applet board. Capturing against corners is still a special case that needs explanation. Is there a simpler way to handle the corners?

Thread: Re: 5x5 variant?

snigfarp — 2007-03-16T21:59:06+00:00

I think that brandub can be a very playable variant if you select the right rules. I think I'd sound biased to say the best rules are the defaults I've chosen on my tafl pages, but then again, if I thought others were better I'd have chosen them instead.

The rules I find the most playable are a combination of various other people's attempts. I started out with the rules as implemented in Zillions of Games. I found they favour the king too much, so I borrowed the 2-man capture of the king as mentioned or implied in Robert Ap Ifan's 1587 account of tawlbwrdd. I found that the attacker still has a hard time blocking off escape routes, so I switched to the layout recommended in Eoin MacWhite's 1946 article in Eigse: A Journal of Irish Studies. The result seems to be pretty much even and very playable.

There is another layout, which is labelled Ballinderry III on my site's applet. It's rather pretty, but I don't think it plays as well as the plain + shape. The attackers are positioned in such a way that no defender can break free without being captured, which doesn't seem a good way to start the game.

Some people prefer to believe that brandub wasn't a tafl game at all, and have invented an alternative game to play with the same board and pieces (it's on BGG as Brandubh: Celtic Royal Chess). That's where the layout with attackers in the corner and defenders in an X comes from. That layout wouldn't work too well if, like me, you believe that brandub is a tafl game: the king would start with a very open and therefore powerful position.

I'm glad you like the web site. If you play hnefatafl a lot you'll find that the AI on that applet is very weak, but I find that it still beats me at brandub if I give it a decent amount of time to think.

Thread: Re: 5x5 variant?

jaredhayter — 2007-03-15T21:35:15+00:00

What are your thoughts on the playability of Brandub, which also features eight attackers against four defenders? In terms of playability and game balance, what are the best parameters for 7x7 brandub 8 vs 4? I'd guess you'd say the defaults on you website. Fair enough, but I'm also curious as to why you chose the particular starting position you did when I've also seen a start with attackers next to the corners and even defenders in an x? Defenders in an x looks rather unorthodox to me but what is the logic that determines starting atacker positions? Thanks for your input and for your great website. I've only just started to learn about tafl games and I'd like to come to understand them a little better.

Thread: Re: the official rules

snigfarp — 2007-03-09T19:43:48+00:00

ddyer wrote:

The only reason not to go to larger boards is to walk-before-running.
At least until there is a dedicated community of players, a short and
simpler game is much more accessible.

In which case, there's always brandub, with 13 pieces on a 7x7 board. It's the default game on the applet on my web page I mentioned earlier. I find it quite balanced and very playable.