Timeline for Who attempted to betray the Boston King?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2020 at 22:39 | history | edited | Rewan Demontay | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Removed wrong guess
|
| Mar 19, 2019 at 1:29 | vote | accept | Rewan Demontay | ||
| Mar 19, 2019 at 1:29 | history | bounty ended | Rewan Demontay | ||
| Mar 15, 2019 at 14:24 | comment | added | Shanty | oh. ok. I got confused between the White colored bishop and the Black bishop on white square as both are referred to as white squared bishop.. | |
| Mar 14, 2019 at 7:00 | comment | added | Shanty | @Rewan Demontay , Could you explain more? I do not understand the "forbidden move" used here. Path for the bishop is clear end to end all through white squares. Also, In phases 2 & 3, the bishop is almost entirely restricted as most actions lead to either checkmate or material loss in the next few moves. | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 12:51 | vote | accept | Rewan Demontay | ||
| Mar 19, 2019 at 1:29 | |||||
| Mar 13, 2019 at 7:46 | comment | added | Shanty | +1 for the update. There does not seem to be enough evidence of treachery to easily figure out the traitor using just the maps. | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 5:08 | comment | added | Amorydai | @RewanDemontay Ok then, I got an update, this is my final answer! LOL | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 5:05 | history | edited | Amorydai | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2033 characters in body
|
| Mar 12, 2019 at 10:38 | comment | added | nishuba | In the second diagram, the piece in question had to come from a certain field (rot13: sbkgebgfvk) if he was the last to move. It could have moved to (rot13: pnrfnesvir ) and attacked (rot13: oenibguerr). | |
| Mar 12, 2019 at 6:09 | comment | added | Amorydai | @Shanty In the comments, the OP states that if a piece is removed from the board, it is not necessarily dead, as evidenced by the king having his son and two other knights still alive after the battle. So his son could have survived the initial charge but was wounded a removed from the battle later on. Also, it is never stated the king only has one son - he could have been talking to another son who was a knight but wasn't in the battle. | |
| Mar 12, 2019 at 5:59 | comment | added | Shanty | I am still trying to figure this puzzle out, but it cannot be one of the knights who were in the battle. Only 1 Knight is shown to survive the battle and that one is the king's son. The king's son survived the charge (mentioned: first phase) and he was a knight (mentioned: after arriving at castle). | |
| Mar 12, 2019 at 5:36 | history | answered | Amorydai | CC BY-SA 4.0 |