Add topic
From Looney Pyramid Games Wiki

This looks fun. I like the coordination of the pyramids with the suit colors.

A Mega-Volcano board seems like it would be a little cramped; it's hard to see chess-like moves on such a tight grid. If you have a regular US 54-card deck with a couple of jokers (or a joker and a publisher's card), the remaining deck after removing 9 cards for each player could be used to construct the board, tiling all 36 cards face-down, in the crosswise manner of Zarcana/Gnostica/Zark City. --Carthoris 17:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

You can play it on any board you want as long as it's six spaces wide. In my experience it works absolutely fine on a 6x6, though. I really like tight boards since they get the action started quickly and make it less likely for games to drag on. Larger boards lead to longer games, which is not something I advocate without good reason. Depending on the players' choices, there can be a capture in Krump on a player's first move. That's the kind of game I like. It might not be for you, though.
You also need to keep in mind that while you're making chess-like moves, you're actually making Krump moves. If you just want to make the sames moves as in chess, I've heard there's a pretty good game out there where you can do that.  :)
Using cards as you describe for the board is certainly a thing you can do. I don't know that I'd recommend it, though, since it would be huge and seeing moves on a board like that could prove difficult due to the orientation of the cards. It seems much better to simply use a 6x6 grid.
- brilk 20:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I wasn't actually suggesting a different grid than 6x6, and I agree with you that the small board is an asset to play and pacing (theoretically for this one anyhow, not having played it yet). The tendency toward smaller grids among pyramid games (Volcano 5x5, Mega-Volcano & Martian Coaster 6x6, 2-player Martian Chess 8x4, and others) is something I find attractive.
Where I disagree is the idea that it would be harder to see the moves on a board with larger squares. I'm a Volcano fan, and I like the aesthetics of deep stacks and nests packed tightly together in that game and its ilk, but the chess-style moves in Krump seem to call for a more chess-like visual presentation.
The playing card board I describe should only be about 20" on a side, not at all enormous, though a little larger than a standard chessboard. Well, the proof is in the pudding, and I've certainly got what I need on hand to try it both ways. --Carthoris 20:51, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
My issue with seeing moves was due to the alternating orientation of the cards. Size-wise, I already find my 20" chess boards too large for pyramids, so I'm pretty sure a 6x6 of the same size wouldn't work for me, either. Opinions will definitely vary there.
- brilk 21:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay, what you meant in your original post finally hit me. I didn't get that your whole issue was with the size of the spaces. I've never had that issue (or seen anyone with that issue), but it's probably best to try a board with larger spaces if you have problems with standard-sized boards.
- brilk 21:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I gave it a play today. The volcano board worked fine, despite my apprehensions. But I was a little confused by the movement procedure. If I'm red, but I'm using captured pyramids as movement pyramids on my three black cards, I'm still moving my own red pieces on the board, right? --Carthoris 01:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You always only move your own units. You can also use movement pyramids of either color on any movement cards you play, not just on cards of the same color. I just looked over the rules again and they seem very clear about this. Let me know if it's actually unclear and I'm missing something.
- brilk 05:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I've got it now. The movement mechanism is a little unusual, and you've presented it in a very condensed style. The rules could probably benefit from a worked-out example of one player's movement for one round. --Carthoris 14:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
One issue with an example of one player's movement is that it would have to be an example of both player's movement due to the way movement works. That's a lot of words and space that I don't really feel are necessary, since the rules appear to have no ambiguities in those areas and are very short. If I find out more people are not understanding the rules, I'll definitely add examples, though.
I noticed you have the game rated lower than Treehouse on the list of games you've played. Could you possibly offer some feedback on why you did that and what aspects of the game you didn't like? I've played a fair bit of both, and it really surprises me that someone who has Martian Chess at #2 and enjoys chess variants would rate Krump below a game that's basically a slow motion coin flip (which I understand some folks do enjoy). It sounds like you may not have played Krump using the correct rules, though, which would definitely hurt the game.
- brilk 17:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll be playing Krump again soon (maybe today), after which I expect it to move up in my rankings--as I even anticipated on my profile page. --Carthoris 17:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)