Comments by jean-louiscazaux
HG says: "if a virgin King is on h1, a black Bishop on h2, and a black Knight on g4, the King can move to h3. If his own Bishop was on h2 instead, he could not. "
>>As Fergus said, in both cases, the Bishop on h2 being black or white, the King cannot jump on h3 because h3 is a square under threat.
For several reasons, I wanted to put in Metamachy the original rule of the old medieval King's leap (although they had no real standards in those times) which preceded the modern castling in chess. This is why I kept the rule that he can jump over a threatened square, although it is a bit weird, I agree.
There is the same relic in modern castling. We don't see it because when we mechanically castle, we first move the King two steps, he is not jumping. But the castling's root was a particular case of the King's jump, where the Rook was coming close to the King and the King jumping over. We still have the rule that the square d1 or f1 shall be not attacked.
Zanzibar follows Metamachy, that's right.
I'm sorry, this thread is becoming very confusing ... and I'm adding confusion, really sorry. I made an awful typo.
HG you say: "No, this is not what Fergus said. He said the King could not go to h3 because h2 was attacked. h3 is not attacked. And what Fergus says contradicts what you say: according to Fergus the black Knight is actually considered to attack the black Bishop, a piece of its own color that he cannot capture. While you said: "Pieces are never attacking friendly pieces..."
Sorry sorry. I made a mistake. This is my correct sentence:
>>As Fergus said, in both cases, the Bishop on h2 being black or white, the King cannot jump on h3 because h2 is a square under threat.
Sorry, I meant h2 and I don't know why I wrote h3, which is absurd. As I said, I agree with Fergus.
The black Knight "attacks" h2. When a white piece is on h2, the black Knight obviously attacks that white piece. If it is a black piece which is on h2, then that piece is "protected" by the black Knight. You say "attack (by a friend)", I say "protected", this is just a different understanding of "attacking". "To attack" as something aggressive in my language, which is opposite to "to protect", but for the square which is concerned, it is the same.
No more complicated than that. If I define the rule relatively to the square which is or not under threat, I think it is clear.
I'm not perfect. I speak French every day, not English, please forgive me if I use '"threatened" instead of I don't know what else. If we start to criticize each other for such things, then let's scrutunize every variant that we give in our chess variants pages and not only mines. I believe everyone has understood what the rules of Metamachy or Zanzibar are with respect to that point.
About pinning, common sense is to apply the principle which is in the rules of chess, article 3.1 of FIDE laws:
- A piece is considered to attack a square, even if such a piece is constrained from moving to that square because it would then leave or place the king of its own colour under attack.
The new link is broken too. Fortunately this paper as well as many others can be found on my webpages, here (in authors' alphabetic order)
http://history.chess.free.fr/library.htm
No I don't believe that you are stupid. You are not at all. But you always want to have the last word and your words are often difficult to swallow. Look here "Authors should not be blind to imperfections in their work, and the normal response would be to repair the defects"
I'm not blind at all and I welcome positive remarks. I have currently people play testing this variant quite intensively and I will take their feedback into account. I know the benefits of peer review as I practice this a lot in my professional life too. But what are the "imperfections" and "defects" you corrected here? We are just talking of something that was not an imperfection but rather something you were not understanding.
I was happy to post this new game here but now this page is spoiled. A new reader coming here will conclude that this game is flawed and has imperfections. Nice.
I was happy to come back on CVPs after so many years of absence but every post I've made these last weeks have turned to upsetting feedbacks. I will stop here. I wish you success because these pages in overall are really great and a very valuable source of information for the researchers interested in chess variants like me.
It seems that the first diagram is missing, showing the line-up before putting the major pieces. If it has been lost, it can be found here: http://history.chess.free.fr/images/zanzibar/zanzibar-XL0.jpg
I don't know how to do it. When I created the page for submission the form/template was asking to a weblink to upload the images. I thought it was what I did, believing it was then uploading the images to a local server, not just taking the link.
Now to modify, if I click on EDIT, I get a form/template but I cannot make any changes on the content of the page.
Is there a way for me to edit that page? Thank you
Wait a minute. I was hitting the "edit" link which is at the bottom of the page, not the one in the black rectangle. I was confused. It is confusing. I try again, sorry.
Sorry, I have tried but I'm not skilled enough. 1) when I upload a graphic, I choose the file on my HD, then I take "Upload file" (under my User ID/password) and then I get a white screen with only this address:
https://www.chessvariants.com/index/memberupload2.php
And I don't knwo if it was successful or not. I have tried with Safari and Firefox, I get the same result.
2) when I edit the page, I see the code with SRC in HTML and the address to the external page, but what shall I put to make a link to local?
Forgive my ignorance
OK, thank you. I have been able to upload 2 graphics. I was only able to do them one by one, and to enter my password at every upload, sometimes twice. Finally, after only 2 successful uploads, I have reached by upload size limit and I cannot go forward. This is a bit hassling.
The texts still says: The antelope is a (3,4)-jumper, i.e., it moves (with or without taking) four squares horizontally and five vertically, or five squares horizontally and four vertically.
It should be corrected as:
The antelope is a (3,4)-jumper, i.e., it moves (with or without taking) four squares horizontally and three vertically, or three squares horizontally and four vertically.
Btw, what is the name of the (2,4) jumper?
Thank you very much. I have been able to upload all diagrams and the process was very lean.
Yesterday, it was my mistake for the size limit. Instead of uploading the jpg diagrams I have made for my own website, I uploaded instead the source images coming from the board painting tool, which are much heavier. Thank you for your help.
A player may have 2 Lions as a Kirin may be promotted to a Lion
Yes, this page can be deleted. It was an attempt to make a game preset, but I gave up, it's beyond my programming skills alas
This page has several problems when displayed. I've tried both Safari and Firefox on a Mac Book and the result is really too bad. Also the rules are not all given: for instance the placement rules are not given. Instead there is a link to an external website ... where several diagrams are not displaying either. I suggest that this page is improved when possible.
I have 2 questions about the brouhaha squares:
1) What is the advantage of allowing a capture on a brouhaha square? Spontaneously, I find this strange: I understood that such a square hosts a piece until it is activated and enter into play, then the square disapears. Then, this square is not part of the play area really. So, I wouldn't have allowed a capture on it at all. Maybe there is something I don't see.
2) Why this name of "brouhaha" square? At least in French a brouhaha is a surrounding noise. Those squares are more like a fog, brouillard in French. Brouhaha/brouillard, is there a linguistic confusion there?
Fine with "brouhaha", it's a funny name, sounding nice. I understand the reluctance of having a piece standing there as a threat and that would be unvulnerable.
When the piece enters on the real board, is there any limitation? Can it capture, check or hinder a check?
Maybe a good practice would be to forbid their capture as long as they stay "in the brouhaha" but also to forbid their first entering move to be a capture, a check or hinder a check?
What do you think? Would it work?
I agree HG, the simplest the rules, the better. It is a principle that I always try to apply in the games I invent (not only chess related) and that we apply in the circle of games inventors (MALT) we have in my region. Always we start from a set of rules and after testing and testing, we remove rules. :=) Good practice!
As it is (in Brouhaha chess and Apothecary chess), actually there is the need of an extra rule to specify that it is forbidden to enter the waiting square except to capture the piece which stands on it.
This is exactly to simplify that point that I started thinking about it. I found this exception strange. The simplest rule would be to forbid any incoming on that square no?
But there is the point mentionned by Greg, which is true, that the waiting piece would be in the same time threatening and immune. So, I was wondering if forbidding an entering move which is a capture, a check or a blocking check could mitigate this issue. Blocking a check is a restriction used in Seirawan chess for example. Also the entering on the board could be seen similar to a drop. In shogi, one can't capture by droping. One can check though.
Maybe, this is not a good idea if it is too complex.
I'm just sharing my thoughts. I'm designing a new variant of my own, this is why I'm asking you guys, experts in CVs. Thanks
Not sure. What you say depends on the way you write your code. Moreover people are not computers. If I explain that it is forbidden to any piece to enter on a square, it needs an extra sentence to explain that a capture is an exception. The shortest way of writing a code is not obviously the more natural or simpler for a real human. And vice-versa.
Hello. I can't find Metamachy on Game Courier. Has it been removed?
Thank you very much
Just a reminder if someone could make that Metamachy is visible among the game playable. Thanks a lot
Do you consider that the fact that the Alpaga is more interesting than a pure W+D (that I call War Machine in some of my CVs)? Personally, I prefer to give simple pattern and definition to new pieces, and I'm a bit skeptical to use pieces with move-only or capture-only. Especially when you have to recall that the piece do this on some squares and that on other squares. Pawn is the exception of course. So, is that game better with Alpagas instead of W+D?, I wonder.
Interestingly this variant put 3 additional pieces on the decimal chessboard, 3 additional pieces that are, as the matter of fact, old known pieces! Indeed the 3 of them are found in the Grant Acedrex from King of Castile Alfonso X's codex published in 1283.
The Gryphon is the Aanca of the Spanish text, an Arabic word designating an "Elephant Bird", a very big legendary eagle of the oriental tales, able to carry an elephant. Murray translated, a bit wrongly, as a Gryphon (which is another legendary animal).
The Osprey is the Unicornio of the Spanish text, which according to the original illustration designated a Rhinoceros. Consider that in 1283 not a lot of people new what a rhinoceros was and it was identified with the legendary unicorn. I like the idea of a Rhinoceros for this piece that goes deep inside the opposite defensive lines.
The Zebra is the Zaraffa of the Spanish text, obviously a Giraffe, considering that, again in the 13rd century, this beast was a bit frightening for those who had the chance to have seen one. Murray and some others after him had another interpretation of the described move, a step (5,2) instead of a step (4,3) which was a misunderstanding.
http://history.chess.free.fr/acedrex.htm
I also use Eagles, Rhinoceros and Giraffes in Zanzibar but on a 12x12 board.
Maybe, I would have added a pair of Camels, leaping (4,2), to fill c1 and h1. They would fit well the spirit of this game.
Oh thank you HG, my mistake! So, the Osprey is a colorbound piece. Interesting.
My preferred "x-then-bishop" is a 3rd one, W-then-B that I use in some of my large variants (I call it Rhinoceros). The Gryphon/Eagle being F-then-R, I see that pair as counterparts, am I wrong?
I understand now what you call "conjugate". Interesting notion. I've looked with ZoG what it says about W-then-B, N-then-B and D-then-B (the Osprey here). Like you said, it estimated the Osprey slightly stronger than a Rook on a 10x10 board. On a 8x8, it gives the Rook slightly stronger than the Osprey.
Another question HG, how is defined a major or a minor? It's still obscure for me. Thank you.
I was thinking of some very mighty pieces, probably playable only on very large board, 12x12 or more.
Those pieces could threaten wide bands of lines
Piece 1: compound of Gryphon/Eagle + Rook (I once suggested to Zied to call it a Dragon)
Piece 2: compound of (W-then-B) + Bishop (I once suggested to Zied to call it a Basilisk)
Piece 3: compound of Gryphon + (A-then-R)
Piece 4: compound of (W-then-B) + (D-then-R)
Why stopping there, one can have also compound of P1+P3 and of P2+P4, threatening even wider bands, probably more than crazy.
I was wondering if anyone had used them in CVs?
Very good explanation of major / minor notion. Your answer would deserve to be presented as an article on this site.
Daniel, I programmed your variant on Zillions to see how it looks. I was wondering if the castling done by moving the King 3 steps towards the Rook on both side is intentional? On King's side it means that the King goes on the Rook square. Is that correct?
Yes it's true, they are not huge changes, anyhow it is quite interesting even for us, for example to look at the differences induced by different pawns.
For reason I don't know, I don't see the full diagrams: I only see the boards and the piece in its middle, but the possible moves are not shown.
Can someone help us? We try to play Metamachy with Numerist, I have the black pieces. When I click on one of the 4 which are in the center of the board, it activates (with a framed square) the 4 squares in the center of my lines, but how to move the piece in those squares? I've tried to click, to hold and drop the piece, nothing works. I've tried with Safari and with Firefox. Am I doing something wrong? Thank you
We try to play Metamachy on Game Courier. I have blacks. I can't find how to move a piece to the central squares of my lines and then start the game. Is that preset bugging? Or are we missing something? Please help us to understand. Thanks a lot
Very interesting. I see no mention of it in Pritchard's Encyclopedias. It has nothing to do with Byzantine chess which was played on the spaces, not on the intersections. The closest similar game I know is Circum Morum or Jabberwocky chess invented by V.R.Parton in 1961. But this one was more complex with 5 concentric circles and 61 positions. Maybe your game has been inspired by Parton's one.
Thank you Fergus, you spotted our problem right!
I propose to add some ungulates I don't see in the list.
(Source: Le Guide des échecs - Traité complet, Giffard & Biénabe, ed. Robert Laffont-Bouquins, 1993. A big French book with a very large part dedicated to fairy chess and problems).
Okapi: Knight+Zebra
Auroch: Knight + Giraffe
Impala: Knight+Antelope
Zebu: Camel+Giraffe
And my own proposal for a piece that I never found named elsewhere:
Stag: a (2,4) leaper
What do you call an Aanca or an Anka? I can't see what you are talking about
Aurelian, the RNN is called Waran or Varan by problemists. (Source Giffard/Bienabe, 1993)
For the different bent riders, I suggest you take inspiration from different mythical monsters.
Please resist to use Aanca/Anka, I cry when I see that. It is not because the mistake was done once that we are obliged to perpetuate the mistake. Once we know, we are no more ignorant. Aanca is the word used in Alfonso X codex for the F^R. It was the medieval Spanish rendering of the Arabic word Anka. That word designated a mythical giant bird preying elephants like in Persian tales. Murray thought that giant bird was a Gryphon (which was a different monster). OK, Gryphon is too much installed in the CV word to change it, but calling Aanca something else is a mistake.
Especially if it is to designate the N^B which was an Unicorn (meaning a Rhino) in the same Spanish old text!
Look for Hydra, Basilisk, or a full list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legendary_creatures_by_type
Too bad Aurelian you don't want to change your mind. Anka is the word used in Spanish for the Gryphon. Is like if you call a Bishop, a Torre. You can call your piece otherwise, a Simurgh or anything, why a Anka/Anqa/Aanca? Check that page: http://history.chess.free.fr/acedrex.htm
I agree with Chebetol. Also, "In the diagram below, the Sergeant can move and capture to all the squares marked with a black circle. The Sergeant can make its initial(non-capturing) double-step to the square marked with a green circle." In the diagram, the black circles are green, and the green is red! This page deserves a second look maybe.
This CV is quite interesting. I like this idea very much. As others, I'm a bit afraid of 2 Amazons per side. I understand the author's reason wishing to keep the standard respective chess lineup.
Then I wonder if it was considered to keep the 2nd row as it is but to modify the back row with Crowned Bishops (Missionaries) on d1,g1; a second Queen on e1 (behind the 1st one); and a single Amazon on f1 (behind the King) ?
Any thought?
Sure, I was asking to know if what I was thinking had been considered. I have no doubt that this game is popular and I understand that it is not that every dude can alter your game.
I'm probably a bit stuck on the logic, because Sac chess is based on a very logical approach. If B, R and N are considered the basic ingredients, then having 2Q, 2BN, 2RN, 2KB, 2KR, 2KN and a single BRN=A is making it full.
The lineup with BN/Q/A/BN at the center of the back row is keeping the FIDE array in the 2nd row.
I will test a game like this, as a variant strongly inspired by yours.
I would like to move this piece is Zillions. I wouldn't say I'm good at programming Zillions.
I use this string: (define zslide ($1 (while empty? add $2 (verify empty?) add $1) (verify not-friend?) add)) I use 8 of them for the piece (nw ne; ne nw; nw sw; sw nw; etc.)
It works but then the value attributed to that piece is too strong because half of the squares it can reach are counted twice (those in position of dabbaba-rider).
Does anyone know how to fix that?
Thank
Many links in the "Name" column are pointing to 404: Eurasian, Rococo, etc.
Maybe there is a simple thing to do to fix that?
Alas this Man & Beast series for me is frustrating. For reasons I don't know, I see no moves on the diagrams, only a large chessboard and a poor lonely piece in the center. The accompanying text is so long, difficult to get something useful. Too bad because it is a huge work with probably a lot of good points inside. It will deserve a rework.
The name of the German author is Tressau, not Tressan. I know, it's confusing because the original book was written in gothic script and the u and the n are very similar (although slightly different). Here is a u, so Tressau.
It happened the same thing to me. I played Metamachy on game courier, my opponent resigned and now it is registered that I lost and he has won!
Can someone looks what's wrong?
Thanks
Hello Fergus. Yes, the same happened to me for
timurthelenk-numerist-2020-328-848
Numerist (Black) resigned ... and was declared winner.
Maybe the bug comes from the fact that Black has the 1st action in the game, which is the chose the starting array, placing the central pieces. Then only White plays the 1st "real" stroke.
I've tried to play against myself. I place 1 of the 4 central piece, but when I place the 2nd one, I get a message of error. Is that preset bugged?
Thanks for taking care of this.
I'm not able to understand, and I confess I'm a bit lost because I have never programmed with that code.
As author what I just would like is that the player making the choice of the central setup is not the one playing the first actual move.
Would it help if Black was placing his 4 central piece, then the situation is replicated on White's side.
Then Black (automatically?) pass his first move, then White plays the second move, which is actually the first as Black has just passed?
Aurelian you can find them on Wikipedia is that is your question.
The Kirin/Kyrin, or Qilin, is a chinese/japanese monster (haven't you ever drunk a Kirin beer?). Some think that this monster could have been inspired by a giraffe seen by early Chinese navigators.
Like the Aanca/Anka/Anqa could have been inspired by the Aepyornis of Madagascar. The Phoenix is also a monster giant bird, a kind of Greek version of the Persian Anqa. Again, a different beast than the Gryphon/Griffin whatever Murray said :=)
By the way, both Kirin and Phoenix have an accepted usage from Chu Shogi, it would be a pity to assign them other moves.
Kirin= FD Phoenix= WA
OK, sorry
Presenting Gigachess II on chessvariants website
At last, presenting Terachess II on the CVPs.
Hello Fergus
The bug is also affecting my log: timurthelenk-numerist-2020-328-848
I (Timurthelenk) had white. Numerist resigned and was declared winner. Thanks a lot
Thanks a lot. I'm going to start a new game.
Thank you. A mistake in the chess board painting tool. It's corrected now.
Very good. Thanks a lot for your reactivity and help.
HG, do you think that a Cannon in a different context than XQ and its special board, for instance in Shako, can be worth than that? I wonder.
Zillions (I know that you don't like their estimate, and you're probably right) is estimating the Cannon just slightly below the Rook, and the Vao just below the Bishop. I also think this is overestimating. But how far?
In Shako or in Metamachy, the Cannon are still powerful pieces putting a lot of pressure on the columns they control.
I would like to be able to edit old contributions I had made years ago, in the Hans B's years.
Or for some of them, even delete them. I'm thinking of very early ones (proto-chess, proto-xiangqi) which do not correspond at all today to something I would say. Is it possible?
I have tried to make a Game Courier preset for my first time ever. I did it for Heavy Chess because it is easier as I borrowed almost everything to Kevin. I hope I did nothing wrong, if I did please forgive me.
I think we are a bit attracted by the same concepts. Very Heavy Chess is maybe really too much and at the end boring. First tries I made with ZoG didn't show that but time will tell. Using compounds of FIDE pieces is also a direction I had in mind for my family of CV beyond Metamachy and Zanzibar.
Thank you Greg. I would like to revise the text of Toulousain Chess and Perfect12. Maybe I can try the HTML, I do it for my own website.
It can be deleted as well. It has not a strong interest
Trying to make a preset for Very Heavy Chess, I would like to expend the Set "Sac Chess" with 2 pieces: a Templar (BKN) and a Heroine (RKN). I don't know how to do. It would be good also to have corresponding icons for those pieces in the Alfaerie type, similar to what has been done (for me) on the Chess Board Painting Tool that I have used to make the graphics on the Very Heavy Chess page. Thanks for any help
Yes Greg your second option would make it.
How to add them to the Sac set?
Practically where and how "open" the Sac set? My question is probably trivial, but I can't find how to do it. I believe it is not complicated but...
Thank you Greg, it helps.
How can I add new pieces in the Sac set. What I would like to add are the 4 shown by Zhedric, they are fine for RKN and BKN. Letters can be H and T respectively (Heroine / Templar).
Merry Christmas everyone
Merry Christmas to everyone. Joyeux Noël !
The preset for Very Heavy Chess seems now ready. Thanks to Greg and all friends for your help.
Yes, it looks correct. Thank you
But personally, I'm unable to see anything with the abstract pieces, even for the simpler ones. I understand how it works, it is a perfect logic, but it is a strong effort for my brain to decode what is seen by my eyes. I don't know if other people have other experience, probably they have.
Still trying to understand how-to-do things. How can I edit the Set "Metamachy" in order to add more pieces ? Or maybe only editors can do it?
Greg,so what about the ones I have made? Both for Heavy C and Very Heavy C. I even have a game on-going with Numerist on Heavy C. timurthelenk-numerist-2020-357-808
So yes, please add me. Thank you
OK, no problem. No easiest and the most convenient for you will be the best. Thank you
OK yes, maybe it's simpler. The context is I notice that I have a full series of chessvariants (Shako, Metamachy, Teramachy, Gigachess II, Terachess II, Heavy C, Very Heavy C.) where I use 26 different pieces. So I wanted to make a set, using Alfaerie, and I was thinking expending Metamachy set for that.
This set has 12 pieces already; B, C, E, G, I, K, L, M, N, P, Q, R. The new pieces would be: (you can look at https://www.chessvariants.com/rules/terachess-ii)
A >> Amazon (QN)
D >> Duchess (KDAGH) (the Alfaerie for Falcon or for Duke would make it)
F >> buFFalo (NCZ)
H >> marsHal (RN)
J >> centaur or Judge (KN)
O >> sOrceress (leO). I use a star (8 legs) I don't know if there is one in Alfaerie
S >> admiral or Sailor (RK)
T >> Troll (GH+pawn) (the Alfaerie for Man maybe?)
U >> rhinoceros or Unicorn (W-then-B)
V >> crocodile or Vao (please put a crocodile not a bended cannon)
W >> War machine (WD)
X >> cardinal/archbishop (BN)
Y >> missionarY (BK)
Z >> giraffe or Zaraffa (Z)(please put a giraffe not a zebra)
Is it feasible? Thank you
@Greg: thanks a lot. 2 things:
-
the back crocodile is indeed missing
-
for the buffalo, I don't like the symbolic combined animal, it is not the spirit of that set. Could you replace it by the Ox ?
For cazauxgraphics, it is a very good question, I'm glad you ask because I had made this set >20 years ago for my 1st book and it is ugly for many pieces. I have much better, also much more complete, I'll send to you by PM.
Thanks again
Sorry, I went too fast. For the U, could you put a Rhinoceros instead of a Unicorn? The rest is OK, Buffalo / Wildebeest is good
Just a small correction while reading the rules: it should be written "En passant" not "En passent".
I am invited to play Shako Balbo but curiously when I try it says This invitation seems to be for someone else.
Hello
Now, I got this:
This invitation seems to be for someone else. $userid, which is , does not match $opponent, which is timurthelenk. $userid, which is , does not match $_SESSION["userid"], which is timurthelenk.
What I see is this: A Personal Invitation for Jean-Louis Cazaux to play shako_balbo.
I am invited by wdtr2 I see in his personal information that he his marked as "dead" in the database. Could it be the root cause of the problem?
I have tried with another browser and it is the same.
Yes you can. I sent you a new invitation
100 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Not sure I understand the question:
"There still is one thing in the rules that is not clear to me, in connection with the King jump: can the King jump over an enemy piece that is protected? "
>> No for two reasons. 1) when jumping it doesn't matter if the square is occupied or not. So it is like if the square was void. 2) The enemy piece is obviouly on a square. The jump is forbidden when the square is threatened.
"In other words, are pieces considered to attack friendly pieces in their path?"
>> This the question I don't understand. I don't see the relation between your two sentences. Pieces are never attacking friendly pieces or I miss something