Check out Chess with Different Armies, our featured variant for July, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments by Simon Jepps

Later Reverse Order Earlier
MSsej[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Mon, Aug 30, 2021 07:45 PM UTC in reply to Bn Em from 07:15 PM:

With all due respect, it is blatantly obvious to anyone this side of Christmas, that two dice will approximately double your chances of rolling a particular value. So no, the "8.33%" doesn't bother me at all.

This game was written with the expectation that it would be embraced as a generality and not a mathematical investigation. I would therefore find it offensive if it were disallowed publication on that merit.

I have no intention of becoming a mathematician. In fact I have always felt offended by mathematicians, not least because my father, who is a mathematician, believes anybody who cannot understand mathematics must be "mentally disabled".

Granted whence in context, he backtracks to "basic arithmetic", but of course that's true, in fact if you can't do basic arithmetic then you probably can't read or write either. Thus it is a deeper bias he harbours and this has always been his insinuation.

Of course not all mathematicians are like my father and so I mean no disrespect, but suspending publication of this article under arguably similar conditions is not appreciated.

The articles on Séj, both here and at my website ChecToe.Org, will remain unchanged.


Simon Jepps wrote on Sat, Aug 28, 2021 05:51 PM UTC in reply to Bn Em from 11:23 AM:

"The chance of rolling any given double (e.g., as in your link, a double 6) is indeed 1∕36. There are, however, six doubles to choose from, so the total probability is in fact 1∕6 of rolling any double."

Well when playing the game one is generally attempting to achieve a particular double, so I'll let that stand.

"Alas, adding probabilities does not work that way. In effect you've counted the outcome of a double twice. The chance of rolling at least one of a given number with 2 dice is, in fact, 1−(1−1∕6)²=11∕36."

I did have doubts about adding probabilities like that. However, since the fraction 11/36 is almost a third, doesn't that in effect equate to 1/3?


Simon Jepps wrote on Sat, Aug 28, 2021 02:26 AM UTC in reply to Fergus Duniho from Fri Aug 27 10:40 PM:

I chose an 'arrow point' like symbol to highlight the two primary kinds of positive result.

It occured to me that the reader may wish to find this information easily.

The wavy line above two straight lines indicates an 'alternating course over the foundation' and so felt this would adorn the alternative rule paragraph nicely.

Thus they are not actually meant to be 'bullet points' just highlighters of the two primary divinations.

Bullet points would not in any way be suitable, they would only confuse rather than guide and so I chose these symbols instead.

Furthermore if there would be any confusion it is now explained here in the comments. But I really don't see why it matters, since all the rules are easy to follow.

People in my town can understand it.


Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Aug 27, 2021 08:48 PM UTC:

@Fergus

They are just decorative bullet points.

@dax00 I am not a mathematician but I see the following truths.

The chance of rolling a double is 1/36. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32313428/understanding-the-probability-of-a-double-six-if-i-roll-two-dice

The chance of rolling a single is 1/6 ~ but two dice thence double the likelihood of instances to 1/3.

You are absolutely correct that the ability to capture does not guarantee any capture, or even that any possible capture would be worthwhile and all these kinds of topics are covered in depth at Chec Toe :: Séj, in the page discussion thread.


The Starbound Sliders. A Chess With Different Armies team featuring rook-inspired sliders.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Aug 13, 2021 02:12 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

I like the Stars, they present a naturally digestible identity, in keeping with the elementary makeup of Classical pieces. I would have invented a more relatable name for them, perhaps 'Sheriffs' or, something you know, that has a real life character, but nevertheless I praise you for their design.

Nice work.


MSsej[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Aug 13, 2021 01:53 PM UTC:

My mistake. The file I was attempting to upload was too big. The issue wouldn't have been raised though if it had told me that to begin with.

I do apologise Fergus, it was nothing to do with permissions. If you could get it to say "File too big" instead it would save you poking around unnecessarily in future.

This page is ready to go live.

Thanks, Simon.


Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Aug 6, 2021 06:17 PM UTC:

Hello there Fergus or anyone involved.

I cannot upload a photo for this variant. I get the following error message:

Upload of /home/chessvariants/public_html/membergraphics/MSsej/Sej-Chess-By-SE-Jepps-Photo.png was allowed but failed! The cause of failure is unknown.


Sorchess. A somewhat unorthodox Wizard enters the 64sq arena, yet with good charm.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Wed, Jul 21, 2021 03:19 PM UTC:

It is of course also possible to enter the Wizard via the Seirawan method and this may well appeal to those whom like to play an undefended Bishop to K/QKt5.

Since a piece must vacate a square first for the Wizard to enter this way, such a Classical Bishop move would still stand strong without imminent capture from a waiting Wizard.


💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Tue, Jul 13, 2021 06:23 PM UTC in reply to Fergus Duniho from Thu Jul 8 11:07 PM:

Hi Fergus, your interpretation of the Wizard's entrance is 100% correct.


💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Sat, Jul 3, 2021 04:56 AM UTC:

I have to admit, yet I also think it so very evident to everyone, that the "next evolution of Chess" truly is the most complicated puzzle in the history of the world.

Sorchess has been revised a number of times. Let's not shy from the truth, it is obvious that the repeated occurrence of necessary revisions is an inevitability of any game attempting to solve this paradox.

Yet as far as I can see, which depends on various factors but mostly atmosphere, Sorchess is now finalized. I actually think the biggest puzzle in all of this was how to simply get this piece to work on an 8x8 board.

I have gone through numerous Opening scenarios involving a White Wizard assault on the Black King/Queen/Rook and to my knowledge they are all defendable with no fatal imbalancing of the game.

The fundamental mechanic which keeps the game balanced is the rationing of only ONE Wizard per player and which ONLY enters from ONE of either Rooks. This reduces early assaults to only narrow Opening lines along very selective routes.

Remember: a Wizard can capture to b5/g5 straight out of the Rook on a8/h8. Or defend the Rook by exiting it to d7/e7, or even fianchetto in place of the Bishop, allowing the Bishop out perhaps to a6/h6 and thus providing both pieces defence.

In any case I believe any worries or concerns I previously harboured about my game have been remedied and purified now with this here good dedicated revision of the rules.

Thank you for reading.


Palace. 7x7 board with a 3x3 Palace at the centre, where King promotes to Queen.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Jul 2, 2021 02:08 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

I like this, it brings out a rural realm to the game. Well done!


Chec ToeBROKEN LINK!. Chec Toe is a 4x4 Chess variant played with a six sided die, incorporating uniquely designed features, such as Checkering, Cross.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Jun 25, 2021 11:36 PM UTC in reply to Fergus Duniho from 10:42 PM:

That's all good, Fergus. Thanks for approving the submission.


Phantom. Classical Chess featuring an invisible Phantom piece.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 12:25 AM UTC:

Now it tells me...

Upload of  /home/chessvariants/public_html/membergraphics/MSphantom/Phantom-By-Jepps-Movement.png  was allowed but failed! The cause of failure is unknown.


💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Thu, May 21, 2020 10:10 PM UTC:

Nope, whenever I click "upload or manage files" I still get the same error message I posted before.


💡📝Simon Jepps wrote on Sun, May 17, 2020 09:41 PM UTC:

Hi Fergus, I have tried doing so but I get this error message:

The directory /membergraphics/MSphantom/ does not exist.

Also the WYSIWYG editor doesn't seem to have an opton for uploading.

You're welcome to save/upload and insert the new  local image address for me if you like.

Or if you fix bug can just get me to try again.


Catapults of Troy. Large variant with a river, catapults, archers, and trojan horses! (8x11, Cells: 88) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Sep 28, 2018 03:11 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
  • "May someone make in effort to describe his/her's appeal to this game?"

It's just brilliant! I had an idea once for a piece called "The Lovers". It was basically a figurine of a man and woman holding each other, but which could separate and thus have two pieces distributed about instead.

"Catapults Of Troy" reminds me of this, specifically the Trojan Horse, with its ability to deploy Archers.

Whilst this game is not Classically orientated, there are good things to come from designing pieces such as these, which are two abilities combined as one.

Nice work. ;)


MLqhesz[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Fri, Sep 28, 2018 03:03 PM UTC:

Corrected a typo in "The Wxyzaerd's Spell", which should have read "orthogonally" instead of "horizontally".

Simplified rules of the realm.

Also, one final revision and added a little extra clarity thereof.

Time to Press This ... Cheers!


Catapults of Troy. Large variant with a river, catapults, archers, and trojan horses! (8x11, Cells: 88) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2018 05:07 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

It truly is amazing how many exquisitely different and unique Chess variants have been invented.

I personally always prefer something more closely resembling the Classical concept, for example Modern Chess and so forth, but am astounded by the dedication given by people like yourself to the intricate details of playability, in what would seem an almost bizarre game in comparison.

Well done!


MLqhesz[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Simon Jepps wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2018 03:54 PM UTC:

I realise what you're pointing out Fergus, that's why I made an effort to say it is at least my Chess evolution. It's more of a proposal than an official claim to fame, but I haven't really the intention or steam to rewrite it with any further modest emphasis than what is already given, in that respect.

And many thanks for your input. The Crescent moon and star is also something freely viewable in the night sky, so I guess Islam know where to go on that count.

Programming for different browsers is work enough... haha... that's why I got tired of it all and became an earthliner. However, I have now made the "Menu" hideable, allbeit dependent on tablet or smart phone rendering.

I will try to make it clear that Rook Castling is still a normal aspect of the game.

Cheers!


Simon Jepps wrote on Tue, Sep 25, 2018 05:02 PM UTC:

*Queue spooky music*

Silly me, lol... the number of times I have edited word, pdf or text documents and forgot to update the HTML is ridiculous. Always chasing around all these different files. This is why I got tired of web programming.

Anyway, have updated the HTML to show the correct rules and all is well.

I hate computers.

*Adjust piece*


20 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.