Item Index Information

Chinese Chess is a game information page. It is categorized as: Two dimensional, Oriental, Xiangqi, or Xiangqi-based.

Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) (Recognized!)

Author: Hans L. Bodlaender and Fergus Duniho.
Web page created: 1996-07-01. Web page last updated: 2008-12-18

Image(s)

Notes

Xiangqi, known by many as Chinese Chess may well be the board game played by the largest number of people. It is very popular in China, and gained a small group of players in other parts of the world. Also for people in the West, Xiangqi is a nice game to play. It has interesting strategic and tactical possibilities, with some nice pieces to master (especially, the cannon). Original sets can often be purchased in Chinese shops, found almost everywhere in the world. A little practice makes that one can easily identify the pieces. Even when one is not good in this game, it can be a lot of fun to play it. <b>Recognized Variant of the Month for October 2001.</b>

Other Information

The board used for this game has 10 row(s), 9 column(s), 90 cells/squares.
This game is a 2 player game.

Other Options

Browse items that also start with the letter C.
Browse items that also start with the letters Ch.
Browse items that also start with the letters Chi.
Browse similar items.
Browse items with a similar board.
Add a comment or rate this item.
Skip to comments section.

Comments

Date	Name	Rating	Comment	Edit
Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) (Recognized!)
2009-10-31	H. G. Muller	None	The defensive pieces required a new approach in material evaluation, in my Xiangqi engine HaQiKi D. Rather than having a fixed value, their value is strongly dependent on the attacking material the opponent has. To implement that I use a material table that is indexed by the number of attacking pieces of each type for one side, and the number of defensive pieces of the other side. In my simpler engine MaxQi (a dedicated version of Fairy-Max that can only play Xiangqi) I just use fixed piece values, and then itregularly happens that it converts its entire advantage to defensive pieces, thinking it is 800 centi-Pawn ahead, while in fact it has zero winning chance...	Edit View [*]
2009-10-31	Larry Smith	None	An aspect of Chinese Chess is that certain pieces are primarily defensive(Elephants and Ministers). Also that the both players need to maintain offensive pieces to prosecute the game. These values can tax a simple depth-search program. Demanding at least a few extra computational considerations.	Edit View [*]
2009-10-30	Fergus Duniho	None	I agree with the reasoning for why Chess has a greater state-space complexity and a greater game-tree complexity than Chinese Chess. Having programmed the rules of both games, I will add some thoughts on computational complexity. This is primarily a factor of the number of possible moves available to a player each turn. Since Chess pieces all have greater powers of movement than their Chinese counterparts, a computer playing Chess may have to make more calculations to evaluate a move to the same depth. The main factors in favor of greater computational complexity for Chinese Chess are the larger board, the presence of Cannons, and the rule against opposing Generals. The larger board affects mainly Cannon and Chariot moves, since other pieces have limited ranges, and the opposing Generals rules. A Cannon is less computationally complex than a Rook, because it normally has fewer spaces it can move to. A Bishop is also less computationally complex than a Rook. Although the code for a Bishop move will be nearly identical to the code for a Rook move, it has as many possible moves as a Rook only from some positions. A centered Bishop has 14 possible moves on an empty board, the same as a Rook, but as a Bishop moves toward the edge, it has fewer possible moves on an empty board. I haven't done the math to tell which is more complex, but I suspect the Cannon is. Although a Horse sometimes has fewer moves than a Knight, it adds the computational complexity that comes from being able to pin pieces. A horse move can affect the possible moves of the opponent in ways that a Knight move cannot. The main source of greater complexity for Chess comes from the greater powers of the King and Queen, the ability of Pawns to promote, and the rules concerning castling and en passant. A Queen may have as much complexity as two Cannons, maybe more. A King normally has more moves than a General, and the opposing Generals rule only adds one more move to consider. Based on these considerations, I suspect that Chess is more computationally complex, but I have not done the math that a proof would require.	Edit View [*]
2009-08-31	Rich Hutnik	None	Not sure triviality or not is an issue here. What may be beneficial is if the CV site had a place to reference other games that aren't in the same family as chess. I do believe the Courier system does enable people to play Go on it (and checkers also).	Edit View [*]
2009-08-31	Larry Smith	None	Checkers might be considered trivial, while Go is quite complex. Though a simple reference link would suffice.	Edit View [*]
Number of ratings: 96, Average rating: Good, Number of comments: 134

List all comments and ratings for this item.

Add a comment or rating for this item.

Index Maintenance

[edit] [links] [associate image] [associate text] [info] [quick edit]

Group ID 'Xiangqi'

The Chess Variant Pages