Comments by JohnLawson

I also went back at looked at the photo linked to, and there are substantially more pieces scattered across the board than the 60 pieces shown in the final set up.

In http://www.chessvariants.org/piececlopedia.dir/ideal-and-practical-values-3.html , Betza gives no value, but explicitly states the AD [funny notation] is in practice worth "much less than a knight".

Yup, I follow xkcd, and that one made me laugh out loud at work.

Minishogi has not been the smallest shogi for quite a few years.  It would be hard to surpass Bushi Shogi.  http://www.chessvariants.org/index/external.php?itemid=BushiShogi

Something is not right on the "What's New?" page:

 Last item created or updated 163 DAYS ago.

David, I also find the 'point-count' classification interesting and possibly fruitful.  One interested in games in general might establish 'point-count' characteristics for other types of games, and then for those games that are ambiguous, one could perhaps, for instance, compare the various 'point-count' analyses of a difficult case like Nemoroth to decide whether it is more a Chess variant or a Fox-and-geese variant.
One of the characteristics could be, as trivial as it sounds, does any game in question take advantage of the physical nature of a chess set to define or clarify aspects of its own rules?

I've been visiting this chess variant site for almost 14 years.  I like
these posts by George.  They sometimes remind me of things I've
participated in that I have forgotten, and I'll go to the old threads to
review the discussion.

I'm glad you're back!

My point about the Ghast was not about pushing a piece closer to a Ghast, but pushing the Ghast itself.  There is no compulsion for a Go-Away to flee a friendly Ghast if it approaches, but if the Go-Away screams, the Ghast will move and potentially create compulsions in other pieces not affected by the Go-Away's scream.  It says in the rules 'The Go Away cannot approach a Ghast, and may be compelled to flee an enemy Ghast (but pushing the Ghast further away counts as flight).'
The mind boggles.

There is either a post or a comment in an article somewhere on this site
where Ralph admits that he mostly designs variants on 64-square boards
because, as a US-Master-level FIDE chess player, that was the board he
could most easily visualize.  This allowed him to do his play-testing in his
head, without resorting to physical equipment.

I found the Fairy Tale Draughts link:
http://www.zillions-of-games.com/cgi-bin/zilligames/submissions.cgi?do=show;id=406

This link is broken, but I found it here:
http://www.goddesschess.com/chessays/Alex$20Kraaijeveld.pdf

There is an old topic thread on much the same topic at:
http://chessvariants.org/index/listcomments.php?subjectid=piece+sets

Roger Hare's shogi pages are here now:
http://www.shogi.net/rjhare/chu-shogi/chu-intro.html

I became a chess variantist in 1962, so yes I know how hard information was to find in the olden days.

Bob Abbott published a paperback book 'Abbott's New Card Games', Funk and Wagnalls, $0.95, in 1963, containing the rules to Ultima, so the possibility of cross-fertilization is there.  I happen to have two copies.

But does it matter really?  I see no reason to be concerned with 'primacy'.  They are different games, inspired by an idea that could occur to anyone.

Lynn, I was just kidding of course, but there are other symbols that are
ambiguous also.  I recently moved from New Jersey to Texas.  Here they
have monuments to 'Our Brave Confederate Dead', and I've seen a county
courthouse flying three flags, USA, Texas, and CSA.  I'm not sure what they really meant by that, but I drove directly out of the county.

'Of course John Lawson played it.'  

What does that mean?  Do you think that somehow I'm selecting inappropriate variants to play?  Maybe, I just want to have fun.

Betza calls them 'anti-Halflings':
http://www.chessvariants.org/dpieces.dir/halflings3.html
Sorry.

Nemoroth is very difficult to play legally.  I think every game Ben and I played, there were illegal moves that had to be taken back, usually involving the effects of the Ghast.
You may also note that no one ever posted a Nemoroth variant.  I toyed with one based on bodily functions, but it was untested, and I am as far from Ralph Betza as can be.  I never posted it, as a 'humor' piece, because it would have violated the CVP's G rating. (For those not familiar with the US movie ratings, a G rated film has no sex, no violence, and is considered suitable for very young children.)

This is not an exhaustive list.
For regular checkers (not cheap)
http://www.chessusa.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=F3-200&Category_Code=CHK&Product_Count=4
http://www.chessusa.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=F3-007&Category_Code=CHK&Product_Count=3
http://www.thechessstore.com/c=mUwXbvqJe2zEk7s142bYNXos9/category/260_other_games.checkers

Unfinished wood checkers (much cheaper)
http://www.craftparts.com/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=checkers

Are you aware of the subject list, found at
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/listsubjects.php?  Although it is
neither threaded nor dated, it will show the discussions not attached to
games, listed alphabetically.  These can easily be lost, so I check it
occasionally for things I may have missed.

Yes, I think the crafts section would be the place, rather than scattered
in random commments pages.

I agree with dhr. Muller in my preference for wooden pieces.  Nice ones are not very economical, and custom designs would be quite expensive.
I did a 'back-of-the-envelope' calculation and came up with a price of about 2-4 USD per piece if executed by an experienced production hand turner, cheaper if the design and quantity allowed the use of an automatic duplicator.  I checked this against prices in internet stores for hand-turned lace bobbins, which are similar to chess pieces in size and complexity, and undecorated ones are about 3-4 USD.
There are other less traditional ways of making wooden chesspieces, notably ring-turning and scroll-sawed sillhouettes, which might be cheaper.
For those who might want to butcher manufactured sets, the cheapest chess piece retailer I have found online is www.wholesalechess.com

According to 'Superchess and Monarch: The Laws', section 10.3, 'A
castling is a move of (i) a King or Emperor and exclusively (ii) a Rook of
the same colour...'  There's more about how it's done on a 10-file
board, but otherwise it's normal castling.
As part of his entire Superchess 'system', Henk van Haeringen defines 50 different piece types, so it would be impossible to define single letter abreviations for all of them, and stick with the Roman alphabet.

From the rules:
'If a Guard moves adjacent to an opposing King, it becomes a Heroic Pawn.'  Is that what is happening?

Sadly, 'international draughts' boards seem to be non-existent here in
the US, let alone nice ones.  I've looked, but I need to search in
European languages to find them.  I can get by in German, and get the gist
of Dutch, but that's it.  And then the shipping charges...Ugh!
Another possibility is a Grand Chess board
http://www.mindsports.nl/DownLoad/Noware/GrandChess.html
but the shipping is still appalling.  And it has to be a nice wood board,
because I already have a 10x10 board made by my daughter as a craft
project for Christmas, and I can't just use any vinyl board instead.
I may end up with one of the vinyl boards anyway, because they are reasonable and shipped from Canada, which is much cheaper.

I also have some (not all) of these:
http://history.chess.free.fr/images/staunton/karpov-set.jpg

Yes, they are all wood.  Boxwood or ivorywood, black pieces are ebonized. 
(I would prefer ebony, but money matters.)  If you wish to see chess sets
I'd love to have but can't afford go here:
http://www.houseofstaunton.com/Store/category=House+of+Staunton+Antique+Reproduction+Chess+Sets&exact_match=exact
http://houseofstaunton.com/Store/product_name=The+Empire+Series+Luxury+Chess+Set+-+4.4+inch+King/exact_match=exact

In my old house, I kept them in glass-door cabinets on display in the game
room.  I haven't gotten to setting that up in my new house yet.

BTW, there were some older comments on this game, including an 'excellent' rating from Ralph Betza himself.
http://www.chessvariants.org/ratings/-unequal.dir-pizza-kings.html

When I was in high school, the Brooklyn Public Library had a copy, but it
does not appear in their online catalogue now.  When I took it out in
1967, the card said the last time anyone had taken it out was 1959.
I would certainly want a copy, and I'm sure there are others who would
also.

For pieces, I have a regular Staunton set, plus three different modern
style sets.  In addition, I have the three Exchess sets (see
http://www.superchess.nl/ for available sets), so I can mix and match
pieces as needed, and they are pleasing to play with, being medium quality
wooden sets.
Boards are a bigger problem, which I haven't solved to my satisfaction. 
I recently purchased a table saw for a home improvement project, and I am
considering making a couple boards in common sizes like 10x10 and 10x8.

Jared: 'Wow, y'all are geezers.'

Yes, but not geezers whose brains have ossified!

Hey Glenn!  Glad you're back!  (Now if only I were.)
A small 'typo': In the equipment section, you refer to Halberdiers
instead of Sargents.  This would be OK if the President were Pope.

I have been a junior editor, and I just do not have the HTML skills to
build new pages efficiently.  [And yes, burnout was a factor.  I was
pretty much finished off by judging the 84-square contest.]  However, I
have no problem reviewing pages already built for content, and flagging
them approved, since that would only take a few minutes.
Submitted pages would need more than two flags.  You'd need:
- accepted
- rejected
- needs work by author
- needs work by editor
and also comment fields, so, for example, another editor would know why I
thought more work was needed, or why a page was unacceptable.

Try this link.  It was a little awkward to find:
http://www.chessvariants.com/index/listcomments.php?subjectid=Game+Design

Re: 'Parson's nose'

In my family, as I was a child in the 1950's, the turkey tail was called
the 'Pope's nose'.  That is US usage, New York City matropolitan area.

Bill -

On its first move, a pawn may move 1 or 2 squares forward.  Or, it may 
capture, but never more than one square diagonally.

Rule quote:

'A Berserker may move up to seven (7) squares in any direction or
combination of directions, and must attack at the end of the move; that
is, must end the move in a space occupied by an opposing piece. 

A Berserker may not: 
- pass through/over occupied squares, 
- end a move in an unoccupied square, 
- end in a square occupied by a friendly piece, or 
- attack the opposing king.'

First, all the intermediate squares in the Berserker move must be
unoccupied, so there may not be a clear path less than eight squares
long.

Second, a Berserker may not attack the opposing King, so it doesn't
matter anyway.

In the games Peter and I have played, it was very unforgiving of error. 
Once a player fell behind, he was pretty much toast.  Having the
initiative was critical.  
If the pieces weren't recycled, the available force would rapidly become
insufficient.  Capturing with anything but the royal piece is no
advantage, and even capturing with royal piece, which eliminates the
captured piece from the game, can involve a loss of tempo which can be
fatal.

Hi Ryan,

Go here http://www.chessvariants.com/onthese/membership.html and follow
the directions.

I dug out my copy of 'Abbott's New Card Games' (1963, Funk and Wagnalls)
and the suicide rule is stated thus:
'A piece that is immobilized does have one special move that it can make,
that of suicide.  A player may use a turn to remove from the board one of
his own pieces that is immobilized.'

Check out http://www.aikidoaus.com.au/dojo/docs/chinese_chess/notation.htm

breadman wrote:
'Why might the Great Dragon be less powerful than the Water Buffalo?'

They both have the same Rook components. However, the Water Buffalo can
also move as a Bishop, but the Great Dragon's Bishop move is restricted
to three squares.

When H.J.R. Murray described the Lion from Chu Shogi in his book 'The
History of Chess' he got the move wrong.  The Lion move in this game is
the one 'invented' by Murray, rather than the proper Lion move from Chu
Shogi.

A fitting accompaniment to the Pizza Kings!
http://www.chessvariants.com/unequal.dir/pizza-kings.html

And don't neglect the Oriental variants Fortune Cookie Chess and Dumpling
Chess.

Roberto,

I have the scores of two medium-decent games played by Ben Good and me. 
If you'd like to see them, drop me a private email.

The major notational problem is ichor.

The ZRF answers all:

1 - Soldiers can indeed capture other Soldiers.

2 - Reducers do not restrict the stationary move.

3 - You can capture your own King, but you lose.

No, you cannot castle Queen-side if the Knight is still there.  See rule
5.1.f.ii on this page.  Also see our Castling FAQ at
http://www.chessvariants.com/d.chess/castlefaq.html

Jared -

If I may be bold enough to suggest:

1. Spend some more time polishing this game.  The problematic rules are
demotion, no drops in opponent's home zone, drop and move is your own
home zone.  Work on this one before you move on to the larger one.  You
already know that people like it, and it was a finalist, even if you
received no prize.  The experience will make the next variant better.

2. Try to find someone to playtest, even via email.  Ralph Betza once said
that one playtest game by strangers was worth a hundred played by
yourself.

3. Send the revision to the editors, and, if you ask nicely, the ZRF could
be updated to match.  Or you could try it yourself.

4. Then, I might write Steve about your game, but don't hold out much
hope.  The last revision of Shogivar was over five years ago.

5. How about 'Dai Ryu Shogi'?

Regards,
John

Minor bug:
On the Chinese Chess preset, the available pieces list cannot find the
gifs for BSage2 amd WSage2.

'At the time Los Alamos chess was invented, computing power was at a
premium.'

I did some quick research, and came up with these facts about the MANIAC,
on which this variant was played.

Memory - 1 k
Storage - 80 k
I/O - paper tape
Time to multiply two numbers - 1 sec.
Contained 2,400 vacuum tubes

In those days there were no compilers, programmers wrote directly in
machine code.  I think they deserve a LOT of credit.

Mike Nelson wrote,
'I feel that WcR will be perceptibly stronger than WmR but I could be
wrong.'

I think there is more going on here than just mobility when we compare a
WcR and a WmR.  My opinion is that tempo matters significantly.  A WcR
cannot move quickly, but its long-range threats are immediate, for it
captures at distance.  A WmR threatens only at short range, and must take
the time to move to make an immediate threat.  

Furthermore, in the endgame, a WcR can interdict the King across the
board, a WmR cannot.  

Therefore, if given the choice between the two, I will choose a WcR.  I
would happily trade a WmR for a minor piece, but I would think long and
hard about losing a WcR for a minor piece.

Although I have only discussed the specifics of these two pieces, the
concepts (king interdiction, threats without loss of tempo) are general
considerations, that, like leveling, affect the values of pieces in ways
that would be difficult to calculate.

Some pieces have abilities that are more useful than their calculated
value would imply.  In Omega chess, the Wizard moves as a Ferz or Camel
(WL in Betza notation).  Although they are colorbound, I prefer them to
Bishops and Knights because they can make threats beyond a pawn chain.

There's another logical possibility also:

Eaglets may NOT promote to Towers of Hanoi.

But I think it would be more fun if they can.

Without doing lots of arithmetic, I'll just comment that enormously
powerful pieces like the Amazon are actually less valuable than their
overall mobility would indicate due to the levelling effect.  I quote
Ralph from Part 4:

'...what's more, if one minor piece is a bit more valuable than another,
some of the surplus value is taken away by the 'levelling effect' -- if
the weaker piece attacks the stronger one, even if it is defended the
target feels uncomfortable and wishes to flee; but if the stronger piece
attacks the defended weaker piece, the target simply sneers.'

While Ralph refers here to minor pieces, it seems to me to be a generally
applicable concept.  Isn't that why we don't develop a Queen too
quickly, so it's not chased all over the board by less valuable pieces?

I think the best approach may depend on how many different pieces and
movement types you use.  One idea may be to use adjectives that are 
mnemonic.  For instance, I am playtesting an unpublished variant of Falcon
Chess with Peter Aronson in which the Falcon move is combined with other
powers.  When an otherwise normal piece also has the Falcon move, the
adjective 'winged' is added to its name.  If there were no more than
four things combined together, a 'Winged Roving Leaping Whatever' might
be easier to remember.
Ralph Betza has taken the approach, in some variants, of trying to
arbitrarily arrange his funny notation to be pronouncable, with mixed
results.  Similarly, you could assign an open syllable to each combining
part, and form nonsense words that would at least be precise and
pronouncable.  So a 'Winged Roving Leaping Whatever' might be a
'WheeRoLee Whatever' or a 'WheeRoLeeWha'.