Comments by catugo
Hello again!
I have sent an email at [email protected], but for now nobody answered. Am I impatient, or have I done something wrong? The purpose of said email was to figure out if my idea was worth an full fledged variant status, or it can be classified only as a bunch of interesting experiments. Thanks!
I need to draw a large Xiangqi Board, with two rivers, which is the best way to do this?
Thank you Fergus, on the other hand any news on my enep variant?
Fergus, have I done enough in order to publish my Enep variant or there is more?
Hello again, and excuse my noobness please, Fergus. I am not sure I included the diagrams properly. Could you please verify?
Fergus, I checked the diagrams again for my Enep variant and I think I got them wrong. How do I check the submitted version, as I don't seem to see the diagrams!
I've discovered my mistake, I have put an extra pawn P in the second example array, how can I redo the pictures?
I reintroduced the submission but now it looks rather ugly because there are two images on the same horizontal line. Any advice here?
People feel free to comment on my new experimental variant!
Enep. An experimental variant with enhanced knights and an extra pawn. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've done several other experiments by hand with this setup and figured out that the side with the extra pawn seems in advantage, although I never tried a bishop pawn setup, maybe that is the key to equality. The second setup seems an always victory for white after several attempts. What do you guys think?
My first instinct after hand play against myself and noticing not only the winner but also the very limited use of the knight enhancement, is that in this case the enhancement worth less than .5 pawns. That is mostly because the knight enhacement doesn't offer much. I'm already thinking about a Grand chess (Cristian Freeling's version) knight enchaced with a threeleaper or tripper (i.e. an (3,0) jumper or an (3,3) jumper). It would matter as it makes the knight faster in a similar manner to the enhanced knight in Omega chess. This could be worth comparable or more to a Grand pawn. What do you guys think about it? This discussion can be applied to Fergus Duniho's Eurasian chess or Jean Louis Cazaux's (I took part of my Ph.D. in Toulouse) Shako. What do you guys think about it?
Hello Greg,
How will you program it, I use c++ to program my other chess variants (not out yet). Will you use Zillions of Games?
I have chessV installed for a long time now. Big Congrats on it, can I program Enep with it, the old version?
One more thing, I play chess rather closed and in my working experience chessV plays rather open, could this matter, if so probably not much. Still 4 points for a knightwa seems a bit much to me, maybe 3.8. Should we try a vs 2 pawns aproach meaning depraving the knightwa side of an pawn? 3.8 could be "lying with numbers" as mister Betza says in a few articles!
@HG
I was aware of your rule of thumb, from somewhere on the internet, I don't remember where. I was out to check it and maybe improve it. But actually what I was most interested in, is there a way to derive these coeficients? I see no reason for them to be linear, although linear (the relationship between capturing strength and movement strength) is always the simplest case, and I don't know all your work, but to me it seems fine in 8x8 settings. Not sure about the enhanced knight in enhanced Omega chess, but I think it is a good aproximation there,too.
All in all I'm very interested for the desing purpose of my own large board variants of an way to derive the "rules of thumb". If you have any ideeas on that I'll be highly apreciative!
@Greg
Thank you very much for all your help, it is highly apreciated!
I added an extra pawn on purpose, mostly to do something different but also as you say it provides a smaller increment in power, if not for any other reason just because 1/9<1/8.
@Greg,
The fact that altering internal values of pieces changes the outcome of the game is very funny, have we accidently discovered computer self-confidence? :)
@Greg
I was not familiar with sjaakII and fairy max, I'll check on those, too. Thanks for this, too, Greg!
HG,
I was thinking that the 1/2 ratio of power of movement vs power of capture is equal to the 1/2 ratio of enemy pieces vs empty squares. Is that a coincidence? If not the power of movement should increase in importance and I don't think that is true.
I think captures are the important thing in the game as captures could change the material balance. So, I was thinking rather than captures and movement to think in terms of captures and future captures (i.e. captures in 2 moves, captures in 3 moves, etc.). As the board empties capturing in two moves increases via the increased power of movement and decreases via decreased number of targets so it seems to be a better model, giving the fact that for example in my Enep knightwas are fairly constant through the game. This line of thinking is reasonable I think for pieces like pao and vao in Eurasian chess. There is a catch with those specific pieces as the power of capture is related to the number of pieces, too.
Based on 3.8 knightwa (or any other knight enhancement) value that should be a balanced game. Is an very akward game, though. I admit the original to be a failure at least from the point of view of balance but Enep has it's flavour from the point of view of having advantages from two different worlds- the world of pawns, and the world of short range leapers. I guess I have to work on the concept as is quite promising.
Greg,
Could you guide me through the process of adding Enep to the old ChessV, with your help I think I can recompile myself!
HG,
I see it is you who has written fairy-max, now I feel silly for not documenting myself enough! I'll try to get it, but I don't know how I can top your research. I care about larger board variants, but I think if the ratio of enemy pieces vs empty squares is the same then your research into different moves and captures holds!
Game Courier Logs. View the logs of games played on Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I made a comment with a picture,in Enep, could that be the problem?
Enep. An experimental variant with enhanced knights and an extra pawn. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]H.G. and Greg,
This Enep page has been out for a while, have you noticed my last comments? How would you conclude a view on Enep?
Thanks!
I was goofing around with calculations of mobility for aanca and griffin, and I got a counter-intuitive result. I think my algorithm is wrong as it gives a slightly bigger mobility for the aanca on very crowded boards. As the board empties of course the griffin has more squares so a bigger mobility. The question is: Is my algoritm wrong claiming stronger aanca on very crowded boards or am I wrong stating the opposite?
Unrelated: What does aanca mean in spanish?
Not really, rooks always have the larger mobility, Bishops are running the show as they are the weaker piece and so opening principles state that it should be developed earlier. The fact it can go through pawn chains and better forwardess helps that but strictly mobilityly speaking rooks are better than bishops. What I think could be the case is that the aanca is actually a short range rook and the griffin is an short range bishop if the board is crowded enough that short range is all you get (50%). I am still baffled by this result, but the more I think about the more it makes sense.
Me, again with two silly questions:
How many normal pawns a queen on a 12x12 board worth? We assume the pawn may promote to anything. I'm guessing 14-15 based on the progression given by omega chess and grand chess where the queen worth 11-12 pawns(n.b. the omega chess pawn is stronger as it promotes to anything, how much stronger is very difficult to say I guess).
What is the difference in strngth between a chess pawn and a berolina pawn. To me the chess pawn seems a bit more powerful is it has two capture moves (acording to HG Muller 2x as important as regular moves); on the other hand the berolina prmoted more easy, assuming they promote to the same things that shold worth something. I think the difference if any is small; Is it neglijible?
Thanks, HG.,
Another question just for you. Does the new fairymax support 15x10 boards?
Modern Shatranj. A bridge between modern chess and the historic game of Shatranj. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If you don't mind modern shatranj is an inspiration allong with shatraj kamil for my own 15x10 I shall complete and publish in a few months or so, actually I'm thinking on the name great modern shatranj. Are you ok with that, Joe?
I'm working on more large board variants. Among them there is one 15x10 and two 12x12. From your explanation I think a 12x12 variant with camels and zebras won't work either, which is sad. Am I correct?
The point of this beeing that I'm going to work on my own machine learning AI for those games, starting in a few weeks or so, when this is done I'll publish the variants. I was hopping to pit my AI against Fairymax and maybe against the new ChessV, if Greg Strong is here and listens. I understand, sadly there isn't much chance for that!
I guess I was wrong earlier, a 12x12 with zebras and camels would work, an 14x12 with zebras and camels won't work, am I correct, HG?You were clear, it's just that I misread between the lines!
From what I understand a 15 files board of fairymax would accept even my worst case scenario of a knight that has an (5,0) lateral move.
Reworking the program it's worthwhile for me if it makes my variant work with fairymax.
In order to understand why this is important, for you too Greg Strong if you are here, a little bit on how my programs work. First there is an engine- game rules and stuff nothing fancy. Then there is the AI which works in the same manner as deep pink (https://erikbern.com/2014/11/29/deep-learning-for-chess/). So it learns through examples. The difference between deep pink and my programs is that deep pink had a huge database for chess to learn from. I have nothing but a new variant. So, reinforcement learning. But one or two professional (to the extent we may call chess variant programming professional) engines will fasten a lot espeacially the early developement of my catugo (as this is how it will be named after georg CAntor, allan TUring, kurt GOdel- I really like the continuum hypothesys and related issues) AI. This could be done by pitting FairyMax against ChessV and/or Catugo and then learn from experience.
Dear HG, in my book that makes it worthwhile, but no pressure.
P.S. HG it's so nice to learn from you, no machine learning pun intended!
Fergus,
I have written to you again an email at [email deleted] regarding an article I'd like to publish. Could you take a look! Is it worthy for publishing? Thanks!
The next evolution of chess
As a chess variantist inventor two matters preoccupy me the most. The first is the next evolution of chess meaning which game, or most likely games, if any, will take a mainstream place along the classic western chess. The second matter is what will happen to computer chess now that even go has fallen under the dictatorship of computers through the defeat of multiple world champion Lee Sedol. This article is about the first matter.
In my view the first evolution of chess was chaturanga/shatranj. I'm not much of a chess historian but suffices to say that in the 18th century our classic western chess was dominating. That is the second evolution of chess. This one is still here. What about the 3rd evolution of chess? Well it is very much prepared. Beginning in the 1970, maybe with the rise of personal computers, a number of chess variants have appeared (not that they weren't any older ones). Although only two of these variants are claiming to be the next evolution of chess I'll enumerate all my personal favorites for that stating that there are 3 likely candidates -tier 1- and 3 tier 2 candidates.
The tier I candidates are in my view Omega chess, Grand Chess (those 2 claiming that stature) and Ralph Betza's chess with different armies. The tier two candidates are Wildebeast chess, Eurasian chess and Shako. Why those? Well let's go through some principles the next evolution of chess should follow.
The game should be bigger. Well it's not much of an evolution if the game doesn't get bigger.
The game should be simple. Not weird principles or weird pieces, not to say that atomic chess isn't fun, but we aim for generality.
The game should be interesting and fun.
This is not a principle but a fact, the game should become fairly popular (actually Eurasian chess and Shako are not fairly popular but they respect the other principles).
It is my opinion also that if a game is completly solved meaning there is a program that gives perfect play in all cases than it should go down the history path.
What about Arimaa? Well, in my view Arimaa is not chess anymore, and also it handles itself rather neatly through a fervent community.
Also it is my opinion that the tier one games for the next evolution of chess should coexist meaning there should be a world champion in each an Olympiad in each and so on. And why not a triathlon of the three for really crazy players.
The main topic of this discussion are the two claimers, Omega chess and Grand chess.
First the good things that make them tier 1 candidates for the next evolution of chess. Cristian Freeling's idea to push pieces forward and leave the rooks back was a very good enhancement brought to the Capablanca chess family. Omega chess bring two new pieces to the table that make for very interesting play. First, those games should learn from each other, second they don't have enough pieces (omega chess doesn't have enough strong pieces and Grand chess doesn't have enough minor pieces), third the knight is to slow. Fourth as a personal flavor I don't like the Omega chess board with corners, although I admit that changing the rook into a minor piece has it's flavor. Five in omega chess opening the champion and especially the wizard are to far from the initial action. Omega chess has a version of itself named omega chess advanced where the knight has an added zebra just move solving one of the problems stated above. Also omega chess advanced introduces the foul, a very interesting piece. The foul imitates the last move ability of the opponent, which makes it a very interesting piece in my opinion. The second ability of the foul is to immobilize enemy pieces within a kings move. Introduction of this rule could go under debate but I think Grand chess really needs a foul.
Before going to my proposals on the matters raised, I just want to state that I believe Omega chess and Grand chess to be very well done, just not perfect.
What do I propose?
For advanced omega chess, push the pieces one rank ahead, put the rooks in the corner, put the champions and wizards in the middle of the bottomest rank, start with a griffin (a griffin is a piece that makes a diagonal move then an rookwise move) and an aanca (an aanca is a piece that makes an orthogonal move then a bishopwise move). Corner squares are debatable. We get the diagram bellow:
r . . w c c w . . r
. g n b q k b n a .
p p p p p p p p p p
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
P P P P P P P P P P
. G N B Q K B N A .
R . . W C C W . . R
For grand chess add a treeper ((3,3) diagonal jump) just move to the knight, so that we don't actually copy omega chess, add two modern elephant+just move threeleaper ((3,0)orthogonal jump),so ferz+alfil+just move threeleaper. Add an Camel with an just move wazir and a Zebra with a just move ferz (for mobility and colorboundness negation) start with a foul in hand an we get this diagram:
r . . z e e l . . r
. n b q k m a b n .
p p p p p p p p p p
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
P P P P P P P P P P
. N B Q K M A B N .
R . . Z E E L . . R
25 pieces (with the foul) are exactly one quarter of the board like in regular chess.
I also propose that pawn should promote to anything on rank 10 and to at most a rook on ranks 8 and 9. I propose no castling. Castling rules can be invented if desired. Pawn double move and en passant are like in classic western chess as the distance between white and black pawns is the same.
I don't consider these new variants but variations of the original games, and I believe them to be perfect for tier I next evolution of chess. I hope the gods of chess variants will forgive me for daring to try to improve such well recognized variants.
What about chess with different armies. That's also a brilliantly done variation but in my opinion it can also use a foul. Because the board is so small the fouls ability to immobilize should be reduced to a ferz or wazir area, or scraped altogether. If a foul imitates the move of the last moving opponent piece it will take from the flavor of chess with different armies, so my proposition is that the foul should move like the last counterpart of the move piece from the player's army (i.e. Move my bede if a rook has just been moved, move like a charging knight if a half duck has just been moved). One may also try to allow promotion to knight or bishop or their counterparts on rank 7. Just saying.
As for wildbeast chess, eurasian chess and shako I consider them lesser candidates so I don't put them under microscope.
What about the 4th evolution of chess. For now leave that on me, for my next article, and my next variants.
Please excuse the poor diagrams.
I'm waiting for your comments.
I see this topic has been discussed before so I'm catching up! See you soon!
I see this topic has been discussed before, so I'm cathing up, see you soon!
I, too play shogi on ocasions and I believe to be very interesting. I'm not quite sure what you meant by prolonging the strong pieces in relation with what I wrote.
I also believe that making the games a bit longer comes naturally. Games should become bigger and longer in order to increase complexity.
H.G.
I understand now what you are saying, but rules banning captures are akward. Are you suggesting adding such a rule to grand chess or omega chess (or my variations of them)? Minor pieces have also their atractiveness through chassing away pieces more easily and controlling the center from close range or at least a specific place. I think grand chess has enough major pieces and would benefit from adding weaker ones I guess. I understand you disagree on this specific matter.
Kevin,
I don't understand FWIW, but I wached live arimaa players losing to David Wu's bot. I think chess is dieing because of beeing close to beeing strongly solved. If new games are strongly solved so be it. But it will take time. In an older post H.G. Muller stated the games like Omega chess Grand chess(he did not actually used those examples but the point stays) will quickly become strongly solved. Maybe. And this is an issue. But we have to also take in consideration that an 18x18 chess game (GO is 19x19 but has much simpler rules) is impossible for humans.
I've said I have 2 purposes the second beeing creating a huge rich game for computers only. It is 18x18. Computers have no trouble playing for 1 week but humans do. Enough on that particular matter for now.
I would be curious if anyone could judge the ability of my enhancement for Omega, Grand and Betza chess variants (well adding a foul to betza chess it's not much of an enhancement), are apropriate for the next evolution of chess, meaning something accepted by FIDE or an equivalent organism in size, an going mainstream. I'm going for the scenario where chess gets strongly solved and they go for something else.
I think eventually board games will become an affair of the bots (until we become robot computers anyway- then who knows) because humans will never catch up, so maybe my endevour (and yours of course) of finding apropriate next evolutions of chess is pointles anyway, but I like to entertain the idea. What do you think on that matter?
Chess variant popularizing it's not a top down effort , but designing good variants could be. I don't think evolution, in the sense of natural evolution, will shape most of the new variants but careful consideration of strengths and weaknesess of the game. That being said natural selection has maybe a place in it!
Secondly as FIDE already exists, if say someone persuades FIDE to accept 2,3 popular variants, absurdly speaking then definetly more people would learn and enjoy them.
I think, too shogi has a better chance of expanding than Omega or Great chess and partly from the very interesting gameplay, partly because a tradition exists already.
Secondly as FIDE already exists, if say someone persuades FIDE to accept 2,3 popular variants, absurdly speaking then definetly more people would learn and enjoy them.
I think, too shogi has a better chance of expanding than Omega or Great chess and partly from the very interesting gameplay, partly because a tradition exists already.
Fergus,
I was thinking...
In the interest of natural evolution, do you think I should contact the inventors of said 3 variants, because I owe a great deal of inspiration from them and ask If I can publish my variants as fully fleged ones, so when it comes to that website that you were talking about, the variations on the otherwise very good variants would stand a chance on they're own. What I have actually done is take two good variants and combine what I considered their strengths into 2 new better, in my view, variations.
Fergus,
I am concern about the quality of the games, that is why I asked for advice from knoledgeble people. So any comments on the actual games? Or anyone else for that matter. Comments on the quality of my games are highly apreciated, as I am rather new.
Kevin,
We live in the age of the internet, so playing online overcomes many of the problems related to not having enough material. I never played chess professionally but if i had the resources (I don't) I'd gladly organize chess variants events.
I think I was not clear on a matter of outmost importance. The point of this small discussion I launched was to find objectively good variants to play, for that contributions to the same game by many variantists are welcomed, so tell me: Aurelian you did that good, that wrong., H.G. started it a little bit. I'm going to do a little self criticism too. A treaper (3,3) enhancement to the knight (the fact that is just move has no bearing here) could be a little be to long to be effective (espeacially in the opening) on a 10x10 board.
I've managed to put in more beautiful diagrams. So what do the letters mean:
For the top diagram: R=Rook;W=Wizard;C=Champion;A=Aanca;G=Griffin;N=kNight (has also a zebra just move);B=Bishop;Q=Queen;P=Pawn
For the bottom diagram: R=Rook;Z=Zebra (has also a ferz just move);L=cameL (has also a wazir just move);E=modern Elephant(ferz+alfil+treaper just move);A=Archbishop;M=Marshall;N=kNight (has also a threeleaper just move);B=Bishop;Q=Queen;P=Pawn
In both games each player starts with a foul in hand. A foul may be placed during a move on a place vacated by a non-pawn piece moved for the first time. A foul imitates the last move of the opponent. A foul my imobilize kingwise adjacted pieces.
What do you guys think about these games, are they better that the originals? Are they good enough to be published?
H.G. I think you are sadly correct, but this doesn't stop my passion for inventing better games if possible!
Regarding my second to last comment I also changed some of the rules of the game!
I think I have to do a bit of work with pieces like aanca, and maybe scrape the foul totally as it's difficult to implement- I am refering more to the freezing ability.
I guess I have to learn Betza's funny notation, which is not hard but i don't remember for example how to write a moving and capturing camel+moving ferz. Thanks for the food for thought H.G.
How do I write the AAnca in betza's funny notation?
and I want my aanca to be able to stop after the wazir move!
Thanks HG, I had already found the funny notation materials!
Interactive diagrams. Diagrams that interactively show piece moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]1. Is it possible to add and foul, a piece that imitates the last move of the opponent?
2. I'd like on a 10x10 board to make the promotion zone from rank 8 to rank 10 for pawns. Pawns should promote to maximum rooks at ranks 8 and 9 and everything on rank 10. Can I do that?
Thanks, for this wonderful tool you just uncovered for me!
Interactive diagrams. Diagrams that interactively show piece moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Still is a very useful tool, so thaks for it!
What do I do with the result, as I'd like to experiment with playing the game a little bit before submiting it. Earlier I've deleted a pawn and I had to do it all over again. I do not want to repeat that. Now that I tried it a bit it doesn't seem worthy for publishing IMO.
Fergus,
I agree with what you said, I'll still try them just for fun, but it's hard to come by a worthy successor.
I meant fool, yes, please pardon my English spelling.
Also all the 3 long jumps are a bit awkward on 10x10. I think they'll work fine on 12x12, but a 12x12 board raises new problems.
Thank you for minding my ideas! It is appreciated.
I'll try the games using HG's diagrams, but I don't think I'll publish them as variants, as spamming variants is not useful. Something I studied and could prove useful is my ability to do machine learning programs, maybe I can come up with clever AI for some variants, and compete with HG and Greg, I don't claim their experience but who was born knowledgeable.
Besides that I have some idea of new variants, so I know that I'm always welcomed here.
P.S. I haven't forgot to use the spell checker now :).
Interactive diagrams. Diagrams that interactively show piece moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Ok, thanks! I actually know nothing about JS but i'm good with general programming so I guess i'll handle myself!
In the meantime, I think I inadvertently posted 2 variants I did not suppose to, How do I delete them?
Ok, I have no clue how to do what you've just said on my computer, if you have the time to tell me the baby steps, or let me send you the html code that the wizard has done, make work on your machine and then send me the result i'll owe you a beer, in my first trip to US, or your first trip to Romania
Well, we teach children more and more complicated things, and we have more and more complicated machines to teach us the grand master level. So a 10x10 variant with 24 pieces is really no effort. That is not to be said for increasingly large variants. The point of this discussion was that some games exist and they should look at each other in order to better themselves.
My introduction of the griffin and aanca was somewhat arbitrary, they were the first pieces that came to mind when asking myself about non-queen major rider pieces so I wouldn't repeat the archbishop and Marshall in the other variant. The griffin and aanca are, yes difficult to use pieces.
I think orthodox chess should be always for kids but larger board variants should enter the repertoire of adults.
My main fear is that chess playing actually is a craft for the machines and for humans we should keep hold off games like Dixit for example. That's not an issue, just something we should be aware of.
To put it in perspective why the dichotomy between homo sapiens and machines. I have a permanent debate with a friend of mine about human intelligence vs machine intelligence. Him, a Dune fan, thinks we should train ourselves like the mentats in order to better ourselves. I think we should base ourselves on robots, eventually, when tech allows it become such beings.
This dichotomy is the seed of my 2 objectives I stated in the beginning of this discussion :
1. What is the next evolution of chess
2. How computer chess should evolve
On the less discussed second matter I think chess variants engines should provide software companies what FORMULA1 GP provides automotive companies. I think variants solving the two matters will be very different, especially in size, but also the aanca or the zebra can't seem awkward to a machine, it's just a move.
On the matter of contributing to a variant that could be part, among others at the next evolution of chess, today I failed, but all hope is not lost. With all risk involved I'll head towards larger board size, for already grandmaster adults and not kids.
Thanks for your time!
Interactive diagrams. Diagrams that interactively show piece moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Well, it doesn't show a diagram of elven chess, but the own text of the html, this is what it happens when I try to upload it on the website, too. What am I doing wrong?
It says: "The image [...] cannot be displayed because it contains errors" where [...] stand for the content of the src=
Interactive diagrams. Diagrams that interactively show piece moves.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I solved it, for some reason using open office instead of notepad does that, now I'll try to paste my own code!
The graphics are wrong, but the script works! For images it shows just cracked images!
It works great for the other game, the one with archbishops!
It works now, have you done something HG? or I just copied stuff wrong the first time?
Now I can actually play games, thank you H.G., I see now how silly they look. Thank you very much! It's now getting late here. See you soon!
That's actually a good idea, Totally displacing chess was never the main purpose as is a very good game. I have newver programmed for mobile but it shouldn't be so hard. An aplication for children is wonderful. But I'm also thinking at something granmaster level, wtih a very strong AI that gives increasingly lower handicaps until impossible levels maybe, where the computer recieves a handicap from the player. That shouldn't block the player though!
Or on second thinking, why not an aplication for children that reaches grandmaster level at high levels of play!
I've made some experiments with those two games. It's actually quite exciting but I blunder pieces way to often! After I get some experience I hope to be able to provide a game of each! For now if you would like to try it yourself here are the scripts:
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=ANBQGWCR
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::e2,,e9
king::::f2,,f9
aanca:A:WyafsW:tiger:b2,,b9
griffin:G:FyafsF:gryphon:i2,,i9
champion::::e1,f1,,e10,f10
wizard:W:CF:mage:d1,g1,,d10,g10
knight:N:NmZ:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=QNBAMZELR
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::b2,,b9
king::::e2,,e9
archbishop:A:BN:cardinal:f2,,f9
chancellor::::i2,,i9
elephant:E:FAmH:elephant:e1,f1,,e10,f10
camel:L:CmW:camel:g1,,g10
zebra:Z:ZmF:zebra:d1,,d10
knight:N:NmG:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>
Just save from notpad with the html extension and it should work.
I personally don't like multiplayer variants as I consider most of them unfair from the point of view that multiple players may attack the same victim. So if that's up to me I won't consider those. Playing against humans of the same level or close it's a good idea but it assumes a large enough number of players, not the case at least initially.
Regarding authority for the game, well the programmers are the main authority, who else. We or they (I'm not sure yet if I will get involved as I am more for more challenging tasks from an intellectual point of view) would consult the community of course.
Time should be enough maybe at blitz or a bit longer, not too fast as the player is not used to playing most of the variants, but not too tedious either.
I was concerned about the opening in the second game as I put the queen and marshall far from the center of the board. That happened mostly because I was not use to with an archbishop in the middle, but after a few trials it seems fine. I have seen the archbishop in the middle in Paulovich's variant of Capablanca chess, so I guess I am not the only one with this problem. I have done this in order to have the minor pieces (the ones who acording to opening principles attack first) closer to the middle. Although bishops could be 1 square more lateral.
I tinkered those 2 games a little bit and I came up with the following value of pieces based on their values in Omega Chess (omega chess website), Grand Chess (H.G.Muller values from wikipedia), Ralph Betza's evaluation of the aanca and griffin, mobility calculation for zebra, and my own observations playing the games, I also named the two games so I think I'm ready to maybe submit them, eventually:
Apothecary chess1
rook 6
wizard 3.8
champion 4
knight 4
bishop 4
queen 12
aanca 7
griffin 8.75
Apothecary chess2
zebra 3
camel 3.2
elephant 3.7
knight 3.4
bishop 4
queen 12
archbishop 10
marshall 11
I decided to name the games apothecary chess as they are obtained adding somewhat arbitrary mutations to well known games in the way apothecaries used to tinker their receipts.
Actually my mobility program gives the griffin roughly equal to a queen a little bit weaker on crowded boards but even stronger in the endgame. The Aanca is the strongest among the 3 in the beginning but quickly loses power becoming 21.5/26 queens in the endgame. Clearly stronger than stated. I think the conondrum comes from the fact that mister betza calculations are based on rook and bishop. So the result is that the rook and the bishop are stronger. The bishop is still 4 (ok maybe 4 and something) because it gets a colourboundness penalty, but the rook must be higher. My mobility program give 0.63 queens for the rook.
That beeing said 4 pawns are definetly better than a bishop in the endgame. Remember the rule that they can even promote to a rook on rank 8, but I never got that far with my calculations.
So new values:
rook 7.25
wizard 3.8
champion 4
knight 4
bishop 4.2
queen 12
aanca 9
griffin 11
Apothecary chess2
zebra 3
camel 3.2
elephant 3.7
knight 3.4
bishop 4.2
queen 12
archbishop 10
marshall 11
rook 7.25
The html code posted earlier doesn't enforce the rule that the pawn can promote to almost a rook on ranks 8 and 9 so you must decline manually not to promote to an aanca, griffin, queen , archbishop, marshall.
Actually I don't see many variants with aancas, griffins, or zebras. I assume there is good reason for that. That's why I considered the name paranoid chess, too, but my father advised me against it!
I appologise to have forgotten about this function, I've done so many attempts yesterday evening with other matters.
I had to change the order in promochoice, but the function works fine provided the piece list is open, or so I think, but that's not an issue
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=ANQRBGWCP
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::e2,,e9
king::::f2,,f9
aanca:A:WyafsW:tiger:b2,,b9
griffin:G:FyafsF:gryphon:i2,,i9
champion::::e1,f1,,e10,f10
wizard:W:CF:mage:d1,g1,,d10,g10
knight:N:NmZ:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>
<script>function WeirdPromotion(x1, y1,x2, y2, promo)
{
if((board[y1][x1] & 15) != 1) return promo; // moved piece is not a Pawn
if(y2 == 9 || y2 == 0) return ((promo & 15) == 1 ? 5 : promo); // on last rank: cannot stay Pawn
if((promo & 15) > 4) return board[y1][x1]; // larger than Rook: remains Pawn
return promo; // choice was acceptable
}
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=QAMRNBZELP
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::b2,,b9
king::::e2,,e9
archbishop:A:BN:cardinal:f2,,f9
chancellor::::i2,,i9
elephant:E:FAmH:elephant:e1,f1,,e10,f10
camel:L:CmW:camel:g1,,g10
zebra:Z:ZmF:zebra:d1,,d10
knight:N:NmG:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>
<script>function WeirdPromotion(x1, y1,x2, y2, promo)
{
if((board[y1][x1] & 15) != 1) return promo; // moved piece is not a Pawn
if(y2 == 9 || y2 == 0) return ((promo & 15) == 1 ? 5 : promo); // on last rank: cannot stay Pawn
if((promo & 15) > 4) return board[y1][x1]; // larger than Rook: remains Pawn
return promo; // choice was acceptable
}
</script>
It doesn't work properly in the 3rd rank it promoted only to QBN it is suposed to be other pieces, and yes it does not promote at the 9 th rank. Don't worry though. It works fine when hadled manually!
I did it correctly once again this is how it goes:
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=PBRCWNAQG
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
king::::f2,,f9
champion::::e1,f1,,e10,f10
wizard:W:CF:mage:d1,g1,,d10,g10
knight:N:NmZ:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
aanca:A:WyafsW:tiger:b2,,b9
queen::::e2,,e9
griffin:G:FyafsF:gryphon:i2,,i9
</div></div>
<script>function WeirdPromotion(x1, y1,x2, y2, promo)
{
if((board[y1][x1] & 15) != 1) return promo; // moved piece is not a Pawn
if(y2 == 9 || y2 == 0) return ((promo & 15) == 1 ? 5 : promo); // on last rank: cannot stay Pawn
if((promo & 15) > 7) return board[y1][x1]; // larger than Rook: remains Pawn
return promo; // choice was acceptable
}
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=PBRELZNACQ
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
king::::e2,,e9
elephant:E:FAmH:elephant:e1,f1,,e10,f10
camel:L:CmW:camel:g1,,g10
zebra:Z:ZmF:zebra:d1,,d10
knight:N:NmG:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
archbishop:A:BN:cardinal:f2,,f9
chancellor::::i2,,i9
queen::::b2,,b9
</div></div>
<script>function WeirdPromotion(x1, y1,x2, y2, promo)
{
if((board[y1][x1] & 15) != 1) return promo; // moved piece is not a Pawn
if(y2 == 9 || y2 == 0) return ((promo & 15) == 1 ? 5 : promo); // on last rank: cannot stay Pawn
if((promo & 15) > 8) return board[y1][x1]; // larger than Rook: remains Pawn
return promo; // choice was acceptable
}
</script>
I think both the tournaments, and the video game ideas are good, should we start a post on each of those?
100 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
While making experiments for my serious chess variants I stumbled on this : In orthodox chess if you augment both knights with orthogonal one step movement (not capture) and give the other player another queen pawn (D5 or D4) you get a balanced game.
How did I get here: I'm trying to compute values of pieces which have different capture and movement abilities (I'm interested especially in the advanced knight in the advanced omega chess, and pao and vao from Eurasian chess). I'd appreciate any ideas on that (Of course I've read all of Ralph Betza's work!).
I've just made an account. Can someone guide me through the process of becoming an inventor (or contributor I'm not clear on the difference), also giving the fact that I'm flat broke for a few months or so.
Thanks for your time, kind reader!