Ratings & Comments

Thank you.

OK the legend was for the setup. I have legended all other diagrams... 
Difficult for me to understand what is not clear. In the text I do list all pieces, then the ones which are on the board, then I explain which other pieces are coming on which squares, then I give as an example a completed set-up. Anyhow, I will try to clarify more.

I will do for the links for piececlopedia, I just have to find out how to do but it shoudn't be complex.

You're right for the Elephant in Janggi, I went too fast, too much focused on the pattern of the move. I'm going to correct.

OK for the Cannon. Yes, this text is made by copying what I have on my own website, this explains why, but I'm gonna change.

Links to CVP pages: yes of course, again because I first wrote this for my website, no problem I'll change. 

Thank you, sorry to bother you

Here's something I just thought of while making breakfast. You can organize your piece descriptions in a way that minimizes the reading that has to be done by someone who is familiar with Metamachy, Shako, or Chess. You could start with the pieces that are new to this game. Then you could say that the remaining pieces move as they do in Metamachy, which will signal someone already familiar with Metamachy that he doesn't have to read any further. Continuing with the remaining pieces for completeness, you could then describe the pieces in Metamachy that aren't used in Shako. Then for someone who knows Shako but not Metamachy, you could say that the remaining pieces move as they do in Shako. Then you could describe the pieces that are in Shako but not in Chess. Finally, when you get to the pieces from Chess, you could say these all move as they do in Chess and just include brief descriptions for completeness. For Chess pieces that move differently than they do in Chess, you can describe them at a higher level. In this way, you could create a series of stop points where someone who knows other games would already know how to play and could stop reading further.

What I meant by legend was a listing of which piece is on each space in the setup diagram. However, this may not be all that helpful, given that most of the pieces unpictured below are not in the initial setup and are left up to one of the players to place into position. Of the unpictured pieces, I can tell which is which, and since this is not a beginner's Chess variant, I suppose anyone interested in playing it will be able to tell the Marshall from the Cardinal and will be able to recognize the usual Chess pieces.

One more thing I'll recommend is including a link to the piececlopedia entry for a piece where there is one. This should, of course, match the piece that moves the same way, not necessarily the entry with the same name. For example, it would be appropriate to link to the Murray Lion for the Lion or to the Zebra for your Giraffe piece.

Speaking of the Giraffe, bringing up the Elephant in Janggi adds confusion, because that piece is not a leaper, but the Giraffe is.

With respect to the Cannon, it would be better to say immediately that it is the same as the Cannon from Xiangqi, because that game is much better known than Shako. You may mention in an afterthought, though, that you have previously used the piece in Shako, as I have mentioned in Gross Chess, for example, that I have previously used the same piece in Yáng Qí and Eurasian Chess.

Finally, please make your links to the relevant pages on the Chess Variant Pages rather than to the relevant pages on your site. If the CVP is missing a relevant page, you may create it.

I have added legends behind each diagram

I don't see the new problems.

The pieces that have no image are those of regular chess with the addition of RN and BN. The text clearly says that.

The diagrams have no legends because they are just illustrating. If someone doesn't see the diagrams, it will not be a problem because the text is saying what is in the diagrams. Putting a legend saying "move of the Cannon" for example is not helping much.

Most of the descriptions in chessvariants.com are done in a similar way.

Please publish my page as it is. Thank you.

I have now loaded new images, consistent with the set-up diagram. Is that OK?

The images used to illustrate the individual pieces do not match those used in your diagrams. Ideally, they should match, or you should provide a legend with the diagram that indicates what's on each space.

Oh, I see that this article article was actually written by me. I had completely forgotten about that. I now adapted it as you asked. I also added a note about 'Lioness'.

Could it be possible to remove now the line saying:

Some of the rules that were not clear from the original description on Jean-Louis Cazaux's website were derived by Fergus Duniho from the Zillions-of-Games implementation of Metamachy.

As soon as I saw it, I asked what was not clear and I have clarified the original description. 

Many thanks

The Japanese Wikipedia article on Sho Shogi also describes Asakura Shogi, which is the "missing link" between Sho Shogi and modern Shogi, played with both suizou and drops. To prevent complications, a captured suizou leaves the game entirely and may not be dropped; the same goes for the king of a player with a promoted suizou.

I think the existence of Asakura Shogi casts some doubts on the idea that the removal of the suizou and the introduction of drops are inherently linked.

Comparing this page to your Game Courier code, I see things in your code that I don't see on this page, such as rules concerning Pawn promotion and the King's first move.