Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.


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

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order Later
[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Jeremy Good wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 12:09 AM UTC:
Three pieces move to the same squares, but not in the same way. The Templar, the FAD and the doublemove ferz (single capture, without Null move):

. . . . . . .
. x . x . x .
. . x . x . .
. x . F . x .
. . x . x . .
. x . x . x .
. . . . . . .

Of these, the Templar is weakest, the FAD strongest. I'm perverse enough to think it would be interesting to have a variant featuring all three.


George Duke wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 08:34 PM UTC:
Ralph Betza's FAD is strongest of these and the same as later McDonald's Omega Chess' Champion, another lack of attribution with Omega never mentioning Betza. Maybe instead Doublemove Ferz is weaker than Adrian Alvarez de la Campa's Templar, since Templar leaps to Dabbabah squares and goes to Ferz squares with or without capturing, whereas DF is two-path to Dabbabah squares and only goes to Ferz square to capture. So, the advantage to two of the three types of squares goes to Templar; and they act the same to Alfil squares as ordinary sliders. [Anyone call follow links here to Betza's 1996 Piece Value paragraphs on FAD, which Omega subsequently develops with new name as 'Champion' in 1998.]

Jeremy Good wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 10:26 PM UTC:
Ah, I stand corrected! ...regarding the relative strength of Templar and (that particular) Doublemove Ferz. Very good point I overlooked.

Now, with regard to the 'Champion' from Omega Chess: In fact, its movement is different, slightly different. The Champion partakes of the Wazir movement, not the Ferz. Here is our Champion:

. . . . . . .
. x . x . x .
. . . x . . .
. x x o x x .
. . . x . . .
. x . x . x .
. . . . . . .

I'm able to say this quickly because I once made the inaccurate comparison myself and stood corrected myself. However, I'm very glad you mentioned it because as you can see, it is a very close relative and also, in my opinion, a very sharp piece.

While I share some of your frustrations with Omega Chess, the Wizard piece does not belong on a shortened board of the type you suggested unless it becomes a multipath-camel-ferz, in which case you may have an improved variant.

When it comes to the Champion, I do not believe any credit to Betza is necessary. Regarding giving Betza credit, I don't know whether he himself was aware that he sometimes reinvented the wheel with pieces such as the 'Waffle' which was for hundreds of years known as the Phoenix in large Shogi variants such as Chu Shogi.

Probably Champion is a lot more powerful because it is not colorbound.


George Duke wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 11:10 PM UTC:
Away from computer I realized cousin of FAD, namely FWD, is Omega Champion, Betza discusses in same 1996 articles, anyone conscientiously developing a new game late 1990s should have become aware of. Thanks for clarifying anyway. When Jeremy mentioned Templar, I had to research it and thought JG now follows Charles Gilman's sometimes leaving reader to fend for himself. Next out of the blue 'Waffle', all right, regular that I am, I still looked it up to be sure it is Wazir + Alfil. Most readers would be unaware of Templar or Waffle. Please define terms insofar as possible. This is cool stuff but always needs foundation. As for Chu Shogi pieces, one point is that a couple of large Shogis, with offensive terms including 'Demon', were forever expunged after posting from CVPage late 1990's, some of their moves never again seen here. (Betza himself points out in 1996 that millions of pieces are possible.) Betza probably was not aware of many of the weirdest Shogi pieces because we worked then within Western Chess standards and expectations, not anything goes.

Jeremy Good wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 11:18 PM UTC:
Btw, Adrian mentioned to me awhile back that when he developed his Templar, he was unaware of the FAD. Just as well. What better place to quote his musings on the subject than here? (From commentary he made during our first game of Templar Chess:)

I got your e-mail about the Templar and you are correct about the piece. I did not know about Betza's piece but I actually considered giving the Templar the Alfil jump. I decided against it because combining the Ferz and Alfil moves for one piece seemed less intuitive to me. And I also wanted the Templar to be worth about the same as a Rook--and Zillions already gives the Templar a higher point value than the Rook without the diagonal leap.

Thanks for filling in some of the blanks for me, George.


Jeremy Good wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 11:20 PM UTC:
Yes, it's not a surprise to hear that Betza may have anticipated the FWD
and you pose a good question about precedence here.

George Duke wrote on Thu, Aug 16, 2007 11:52 PM UTC:
Since as Ralph Betza points out in 1996 articles, millions of Chess pieces
are possible, and CVPage has only, what, 8000, 10000, 15000 variant
pieces, we could well expunge every one of those 15000 and still have
endless discussions on the remaining 990,000 possible pieces. Fantastic.
No more Wazir, Ferz, Immobilizer, Half-Duck, Flamingo, Nemel, Scorpion,
none of them. Never again Promoter, Venator, Quintessence, Rhino, Dragon, or Nemeroth. If you want to reference a one-step Rook, formerly called
Wazir, now dis-allowed, just find another suitable pathway for it. New
pieces, reaching the old Wazir squares, are innumerable. One, the
Earthquake, goes 13 forward 12 diagonally, and twelve cross-horizontally;
and so on for as many pieces as you want and all the time in the world.
(Betza was not original with that, as David Pritchard says in Intro to
1994 ECV that millions of coordinate pieces alone are possible)

David Paulowich wrote on Tue, Sep 25, 2007 12:02 AM UTC:

The doublemove ferz (single capture, without Null move) is the same piece as the Free Padwar in JETAN. The Free Padwar movement diagram comes from a loose interpretation of the rules of JETAN, as given by Edgar Rice Burroughs. The Jester is the same piece, with a special initial move added. I have called the Free Padwar a 'War Elephant' in three of my chess variants.

Piececlopedia: Boyscout / Crooked Bishop 
provides another way of looking at this piece, as a combined 
[Bishop + Crooked Bishop], limited to moving 1 or 2 squares.

Joe Joyce wrote on Tue, Sep 25, 2007 12:09 AM UTC:
Larry Lynn Smith's various websites and email addresses seem to be no
longer working. I haven't gotten his homepage in over a year. So the
links in his Jetan rules are no longer operative.

David Paulowich wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2007 02:24 PM UTC:

Dai Shogi has the Hiryu (Flying Dragon), a two-step Bishop, and the Kirin (Kylin), moving like a Ferz or a Dabbabah. Combining these two pieces piece gives us a Templar. So we should consider the possibility that the Templar appears in some (even larger) Shogi variant.


Jeremy Good wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2007 03:15 PM UTC:

Earlier in this thread, I mentioned (and diagrammed) Champion (or Betzan WAD, which has priority) from Omega Chess. As the Templar is to the FAD, the Fye'tin is to the Champion (Fye'tin is from Gifford's new Disintegration Chess). Both go to the same places, but the templar and fy'etin are slightly weakened. Can the fye'tin and the WAD also both be found, under different names, in some ancient shogi variant?


Gary Gifford wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2007 04:08 PM UTC:
Just a note: Fye'tin is written this way (Fye'tin)... I noticed the
apostrophe misplaced in the other comment.  Of course, if it turns out
that there is an ancient piece like it we would switch over to that
ancient name.

David Paulowich wrote on Wed, Sep 26, 2007 10:42 PM UTC:

Let the Grand Knight have the combined moves of a Wazir and a Knight. This color-alternating piece is called a Brigadier in veSQuj and simply a Knight in Opulent Chess. In Achernar the Grand-Horse moves like a Grand Knight and can also make 'CH moves'.

. . . . . . .
. . x . x . .
. x . x . x .
. . x o x . .
. x . x . x .
. . x . x . .
. . . . . . .

I am going to use the name Grand Horse here for a piece combining moves of a Wazir and a Chinese Horse (Mao). This non-leaping piece moves to precisely those nearby squares that the the Free Padwar cannot go to. [EDIT] This piece is a short range version of the Rhino.


13 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.