Page 3 of 4

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:19 pm
by Hagbard
The Sea Battle Tafl is implemented: identical to Rachunek 9x9 except for the center square not being special, and the attackers begin like in Fetlar.

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:02 am
by Hagbard
crust wrote:Maybe Aage could one day program this version...?
- Did anyone ever try the Sea Battle Tafl? It's on the games list.

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:42 pm
by crust
Sea Battle Tafl (Navytafl) could be the simplest form we have tried - it just has NO complications! As such, it could be a good way to start people off, who have never played any tafls before. Assuming of course that it turns out to be playable! Thanks Aage for making it available to try out.

Hello Aluric, good to have your input. I like the sound of your taflbok book. You didn't say whether your version was 9x9 or 11x11, and whether it has a name. In fact, I would like to hear what names you have for any versions you know, and if you have tried what we call Fetlar and Rachunek :D

Re: Origin of the Rachunek tafl game

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:21 am
by Hagbard
Apparently Rachunek is not alone with this interpretation of Tablut. Here's an American page advocating the same idea:
Also Damian Walker supports the same rules in his article on Tablut:

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 12:06 am
by Hagbard
The game balance statistics for the Sea Battle tafl 9x9 is presently
all players: 22 white wins, 12 black wins, 4 draws,
"strong players": 20 white wins, 10 black wins, 4 draws.

There seems to be room for a ban against perpetual repetitions, which would probably turn the draws into black wins?

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:01 am
by Adam
That sounds very sensible to me. A clear imbalance easily rectified.

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:55 pm
by arne64
Hello everyone.

I tried the following tafl version:
-White starts in the 'plus formation" (has pieces on c6, k3, k9 and i6 instead on e5, e7, ...)
-white has the initiative and makes the first move
-everything else are the sea battle rules

It seems to be almost balanced to me. If the players get more experiences I would guess black has a little advantage though. I think it works better than the existing Unst unarmed king tafl edge version.

[13.1.2016 Hagbard comment: This is the Sea Battle cross 11x11!]

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:32 pm
by Hagbard
University of Waterloo, Canada, has a Games Museum and also on the internet a Virtual Museum of Games.
Here's the department on Viking Games: ... index.html

The collection includes a Tablut game donated to the Museum in 1981, made in Denmark "based on a game from Lapland": ... index.html
The described rules could be called "Memory Hnefatafl 9x9 edge", i.e. friendly throne, king armed, captured from 4 sides and wins on edge. (The text says "A piece is taken when an opponent piece occupies both adjacent cells in a row or column", which supposedly includes the king).
An armed king will, however, make this game seriously unbalanced in favour of the king, but if the king is unarmed, this is our Sea Battle tafl plus a throne.

The collection also includes a tafl game donated to the Museum in 1992 ("the viking game", "produced in York, England, by History Craft Ltd., copyright date 1987"): ... index.html
The described rules are the same as the "Memory Hnefatafl 11x11"; is this the Norse America tafl?

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:20 pm
by Hagbard
Evaluation of Sea Battle 9x9 test tournament December 2012.

Seven players did the tournament without timeouts and played with each other 42 games, the results being
white (defenders) 23 wins, black (attackers) 19 wins.

So, again the Sea Battle balance comes out fine.

This result applies also to the "Rachunek" variant, which differs only in having a throne square, affecting the balance very little.

By the way the "Rachunek" variant goes much further back than the Czech gaming site. Such a game, quality manufactured, was produced in Denmark before 1981, already discussed on this forum here: ... t=150#p658 ... t=150#p660

According to the University of Waterloo, Canada, the rules should be the same as those used on the Rachunek site (when presumably the king is unarmed). But take a look at the board:
No marked center square throne, no marked forbidden squares at all, just a slight marking of the pieces' starting positions; this board is a Sea Battle board!

Test tournament:

Re: Sea Battle Tafl

Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:26 am
by crust
Hagbard wrote:No marked center square throne, no marked forbidden squares at all, just a slight marking of the pieces' starting positions; this board is a Sea Battle board!
I think you're right! One would expect, if the centre square is restricted or hostile, to see some kind of distinguishing mark which differentiates it from the other squares. Without such marking, it should be Sea Battle!