Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I'm sorry, I had not looked at your set-up with 5 brouhaha squares with the Joker in the middle. I have now. And it looks great. So forget my latest mainly nonsensical comment. I don't quite understand about the pieces you want to twist symmetrically, and the link doesn't seem to work. But if you want even more game testing, you are very welcome to send me an invitation (ID: Slavensky) for the 5 brouhaha square set-ups with or without twisted symmetry (if you have the time with all the testing of your new Grand Apothecary series).

The last thing I'd like to consider is that I'd like to try an unseen to my knowledge type of symmetry. The jokers will fill a place in the brouhaha squares but mirroring the center of the board like in mirror symmetry while the rest of the pieces have regular symmetry. This has the advantage of populating the board in a balanced way (as many pieces on both sides of the board), although one player will have a king side minor advantage while the other will have a non-king side minor advantage. I'd like to call this twist symmetry. Twist symmetry would mean that  we split the pieces of one side in two so that one part has mirror symmetry to the opponent while the other has regular symmetry. This concept resembles the mathematical concept of Chiral symmetry but I'm not sure about a proof that it is the same thing.

 https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/diagram-designer.php?submit=Update&code=---jww----%2Fr3cc3r%2F1abngknbq1%2Fpppppppppp%2F10%2F10%2F10%2F10%2FPPPPPPPPPP%2F1ABNGKNBQ1%2FR3CC3R%2F----WWJ---&shape=square&scale=100&group=Apothecary+Chess&set=apothecary-standard&files=a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h+i+j+&ranks=0+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11&font=Verdana&point=12&cols=10&board=23.10.01.10.01.10.01.10.01.10.01.32.&colors=339933+CCCC11+DD99DD+FFBBFF&bcolor=111199&tcolor=EEEE22&bsize=16&bgimage=maple-walnut.png&nextfile=50+0&nextrank=0+50 

Oh sure, that would be very easy as well. An efficient way to representthe board is by an array much larger than the board itself, and surround a board-sized central area by unmovable and uncapturable 'boundary guard' pieces. Then moves that stray off board will be automatically rejected by the code that prevents capture of your own pieces, without having to test whether it ended on the board proper. So all you do is when a brouhaha square is evacuated, not set it to the code for an empty square but to one for a boundary guard. You could do that by replacing the statement board[fromSqr] = 0; in the MakeMove() routine by board[fromSqr] = shadow[fromSqr]; where the 'shadow' array can be initialized to indicate which squares revert to empty, and which to boundary.

Perhaps I should support brouhaha squares in the Interactive Diagram. It already recognizes the special piece type 'hole', which can used to place boundary guards on the board. (Usually as edge fillers to implement non-rectangular boards, such as for Omega Chess.) I could als have it recognizepiece type 'brouhaha', and use that to place hole on the shadow board instead of the regular one.

@Thor,

Programming the brouhaha squares in game code is quite easy. In C++ or another language for an engine I'm not sure!

@HG,

That one turn delay makes the game possible, and quite fun in my experience! These principles came up from 4 years of testing with human players!

If you are considering to have pieces on the first rank with the rooks, there is also another option.

As long as it is not a major programming problem to add or subtract brouhaha squares, then you could consider having only 3 brouhaha's, moving EITHER the champions up to e1 and f1, OR the wizards up to somewhere on the first rank, could also be c1 and h1, for example. You will of course always have a asymmetrical set-up with the odd number of pieces, so with 1 pair of either wizards or champions, then you just have to decide if you want the joker 'king-side' or 'queen-side' on the 3 brouhaha squares.

I agree with all the insightful thoughts of H.G.Muller, and I think ELVEN CHESS looks very nice, and it does not have that 'odd look' at all, probably in Aurelian's new set up it was because of the 4  brouhaha squares below the 'lonely King'. 

Well, it delays their development one move, as they can use their F step to move to first rank. Disconnecting the Rooks in the process...

What is the use of giving the Rooks a free rank if you cannot castle with them anyway? Rooks have to move to (half-)open files, and it will take you quite some time before any such file arises, with not only a full rank of Pawns in front of them, but also a rank filled with pieces. By the time a better place to put a Rook emerges, the Wizards and Champions would hardly ever be in the first two ranks or on the brouhaha squares, no matter where you start them.

@HG,

Withouht the brouhaha squares the wizard may quickly capture powerfull pieces in the opening. That was the initial idea but it does not work! Also, this way rooks stay conected.

Simplicity is a hallmark of elegance. So I think it is in general better to not use several completely different mechanisms for introducing pieces on the board. Use gating, dropping or brouhaha squares, but then stick to the method of choice.

Of course a question could be: why use any of these at all? What does it add to the game that some of the pieces start on brouhaha squares? They still have to make the first move as if the brouhaha square was a normal board square, so for the pieces themselves it makes no difference. One uses brouhaha squares to prevent distortion of the board regularity, which could interfere with checkmating abilities as these are on rectangular boards, such as the Omega-Chess Wizard squares do. So you can create room for extra pieces without side effects on the board.

But why would you want to create any extra room at all, if you already have so many empty squares on the back rank, in your initial setup?

@Greg & Thor: I used that same 'lonely King' setup in Elven Chess. I did not consider it odd at all. Why would you want the King to start in the front line? This way you have free castling paths immediately, so you don't have to worry about evacuating non-jumping pieces to clear the path, and destroying the Pawn shield in the process.

@Thor,Greg&Fergus

Thanks guys for your thoughts on the matter.

So the crux of the matter it is that the dropping of the joker is not needed but the initial position should be given further consideration. What about then adding another brouhaha square for the joker? This would mean a champion more to the side. King in it's original position. King keeps special initial moves.

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/diagram-designer.php?submit=Update&code=---wcjwc--%2Fr8r%2F1abngknbq1%2Fpppppppppp%2F10%2F10%2F10%2F10%2FPPPPPPPPPP%2F1ABNGKNBQ1%2FR8R%2F---WCJWC--&shape=square&scale=100&group=Apothecary+Chess&set=apothecary-standard&files=a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h+i+j+&ranks=0+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11&font=Verdana&point=12&cols=10&board=23.10.01.10.01.10.01.10.01.10.01.32.&colors=339933+CCCC11+DD99DD+FFBBFF&bcolor=111199&tcolor=EEEE22&bsize=16&bgimage=maple-walnut.png&nextfile=50+0&nextrank=0+50

I agree with Greg. White's opening advantage is likely to be a deciding factor mainly between equally skilled players who are both expert at the game. This will rarely be the case for Chess variants, which are more often than not played between people who have little experience at the game. Also, this game is bigger than Chess, and that also makes it less likely that White's opening advantage will be a deciding factor. As long as your game does nothing to increase the significance of White's opening advantage, it should be okay for you to do nothing else about it. Mainly, make sure all the Pawns are protected in the opening setup, so that neither player begins with a vulnerability that White might be able to exploit faster. Also, placing Jokers on the board gives Black the ability to move his Joker first, which is itself a slight advantage for Black.

I have never really like the rule that the Joker needs to be dropped within X turns, so I am happy to see it go.  I do not think white's first move needs compensation.  In a game this complex I think it is unlikely that will be the deciding factor.

This new setup is ok, but I agree with Thor that it looks a little unusual.  The King's position is off center with nothing beside him.  He looks lonely and the queen is way off to the side.  But this minor estetic is probably not too important.

Other posibilities - not sure how much they simplify the programming - leave the board as it was and either (a) have the joker drop in automatically at the first opportunity, or (b) there is no turn limit to dropping him.

Hey Aurelian, as I have said before, I have the deepest respect for all the work you are putting into the programming of this very nice game of yours.

In the games we recently played, it was an interesting tactical feature in the opening game that you had to free up the best possible square for the drop of the Joker within 8-12 moves, but the rest game had so much to offer, that you definitely can live without that feature..

The new starting set-up of the board looks a little odd to me. I think I would prefer the King back on rank 2 and 9. Then maybe the Joker can be placed on a brouhaha square (either an extra square or instead of a Champion). That would give some of the same tactical considerations as in the original game, as to when and how you should 'enter the board' mimicking with the Joker.

But most of all I have to agree with the (deciding ?!) point on your pro and con-list.: EASIER programming.

Btw, have you seen the piece description of the game JESTER CHESS ? There is a very clear and understandable definition of that game's Joker/Fool/Jester. It's a weaker (and more boring, IMO) Joker (not having full capturing ability), but it has some good points about mimicking a promoting pawn or a king..

Best wishes, Thor.

In doing that the pros would be :

1. More comprehensive rules.

2. Easier programming

and the cons would be:

1. no more compensation for black's second move disadvantage

While working on the changes to the preset modifying it to include the joker drop rule, I have started pondering the idea of renouncing this rule.
The programming for the game has become to bloated and frankly I doubt the need for such a rule anymore.
To replace that the joker would start in the current king's place and the king a rank back. As a consequence the king will lose the special moves but gain a castle ability.
I hope the members of the community could offer an opinion about this change.

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/diagram-designer.php?submit=Update&code=---wccw---%2Fr4k3r%2F1abngjnbq1%2Fpppppppppp%2F10%2F10%2F10%2F10%2FPPPPPPPPPP%2F1ABNGJNBQ1%2FR4K3R%2F---WCCW---&shape=square&scale=100&group=Apothecary+Chess&set=apothecary-standard&files=a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h+i+j+&ranks=0+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11&font=Verdana&point=12&cols=10&board=10.01.&colors=339933+CCCC11+22BB22&bcolor=111199&tcolor=EEEE22&bsize=16&bgimage=maple-walnut.png&nextfile=50+0&nextrank=0+50

You still need to remove it, and you have to adapt the code I gave you to Black. While you changed 8 to 12, you did not make any of the other changes that needed to be made for Black. Without those changes made, it is not going to work for Black. Also, the comment I left in the code was a placeholder for code you were supposed to write and include at that spot. It was not meant to be inserted into the code as is.

I tried that, it is not it it seems :(!

I think you need to remove the line:

unsetflag $prevorigin;

@Fergus,

I'm not sure if you've seen my previous comment but the last code you have made doesn't get as far as to ask the question about inserting the joker. I have had a similar problem before. Hopefully you can spare some time this week-end to take a look.

There were 2 semicolons missing indeed. I have corrected that. But still it never goes as far as to ask the question.

When that happens, it is usually because something is out of place somewhere else in the code. When it reported the error, it also listed the program. The listing of the program is formatted so that lines are properly indented. So, you should scan the listing for any line that is not indented properly. When I did that, I found a misaligned endif between lines 199 and 200. A little further on, I found a misaligned else between lines 208 and 209. Make sure all your semicolons and colons are in place around those lines.

To me the code looks great, but after copying it I got at the beginning of the program :

if == thismove null:
say This preset enforces the rules and displays legal moves.;
endif;

this error:

Syntax Error on line 2

Misplaced endif within main scope 0.

This is very puzzling to me. Any ideea why this happens?

I would use code like the following in the Post-Move sections. This code is for White.

  if isvisible $origin:
    set piece $moved;
    set from $origin;
    set to $dest;
  else:
    set piece $prevmoved;
    set from $prevorigin;
    set to $prevdest;
  endif;
 
  // Regular code for enforcing piece movement, but using the variables defined above
  // instead of the system variables.
 
  if not isvisible $origin:
    if != $moved J:
      die You may not drop any piece other than a Joker.;
    elseif != $dest $prevorigin:
      set pname alias const alias $prevmoved;
      die You may not drop your Joker on any space except the one the #pname just left.
    endif;
    delete $origin;
    unsetflag $prevorigin;
  elseif onboard !p2:
    if not $answered and == mln $maxmln and <= turn 8 and flag $origin:
      set jmove join "J*" $origin;
      ask "Do you want to insert your Joker now?" "Yes" #jmove "No" "";
    elseif >= turn 8:
      delete !p2;
      remind Joker removed because 8 turns passed without dropping it on the board.
    else:
      unsetflag $origin;
    endif;
  endif;

I wouldn't use ask in the Pre-Move section. This should be used after a player has moved, not before. Since the Jokers begin on !p9 and !p2, you want to use those coordinates, not p9 and p2, which do not exist. Prefixing a coordinate with the exclamation mark indicates that labels for that file should not be displayed on the board. This is useful for in-hand areas you drop pieces from Shogi-style. The rest may be okay to include in your Pre-Move section, but there isn't any special need to include it there as opposed to the Post-Move section, where other important code would have to go anyway. When using verify, bear in mind that it exits the function when given a false value. This is okay when no other code follows it than what is shown here.