Comments by jean-louiscazaux

I have tried with another browser and it is the same.

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?

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.

I am invited to play Shako Balbo but curiously when I try it says This invitation seems to be for someone else.

Just a small correction while reading the rules: it should be written "En passant" not "En passent".

That's very good. Thank you

@Greg: thanks a lot. 2 things:

1. the back crocodile is indeed missing

2. 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

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

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.

Merry Christmas to everyone. Joyeux Noël !

The preset for Very Heavy Chess seems now ready. Thanks to Greg and all friends for your help.

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

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...

Yes Greg your second option would make it.

How to add them to the Sac set?

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

Thank you. A mistake in the chess board painting tool. It's corrected now.

Gigachess II is ready

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

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

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 :=)

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?

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.

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

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?

Nobody can't help?

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

Very good explanation of major / minor notion. Your answer would deserve to be presented as an article on this site.

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?

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.

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.

Thank you very much

Hello. I can't find Metamachy on Game Courier. Has it been removed?

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

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 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? 

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

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.

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

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

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. 

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. 
 

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.

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