Rated Comments for a Single Item

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

LiQi. Very Strong Chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Just Someone wrote on Fri, Aug 28, 2009 04:20 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

Larry, I think you meant to write 'a move from b3 to d7' not 'a move
from b3 to f5'.  Interesting idea, planar move, like a more restricted
large shogi hook-mover.

George Duke wrote on Fri, Aug 28, 2009 11:04 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

''Very Strong Chess'' is misnomer. 
Planar they are as legitimate piece-type.
'Fussy'' is to properly point out when something has been done before so as not to keep wasting people's time. ''Fudgy'' is not to do so. I question ''extremely powerful pieces,'' as that applies only to Tianwang. Now Tianwang is John Conway's Angel of the 1970s. Those are two points in one. What other pieces in LiQi do you think are more powerful than Queen? I think LiQi is kind of cool and original. The usual critique, if we are ever going anywhere, applies widely that since no one much is going to play it, it's another artwork to be appreciated at a distance, being nothing fundamental about LiQi per se. The ''flavour'' Larry refers to no one beyond a handful of dabblers will ever enjoy and we are all perfectly glad to take his word for it -- this dynamics of developer as sole tester has been demonstrated over and over. It's almost a given. But Planar Pieces ARE probably fairly basic or fundamental. Not singling out Larry Smith on planar, but applying to, for example, Joe Joyce on differences between Shatranj and OrthoChess (an immediately concurrent topic), and applying to Rococo copycats of say Michael Nelson or Charles Daniel, and applying likewise to the majority of games after about 2005 -- why not perform differently? In the future, instead of cliched ''new CV'' ''new CV'', like a 911 alarm, no one will ever much play, why not consider making a reference article or history or piece-type essay?  Here JiaoYe and FeiYe and BenYe, Larry says, are the whole point of LiQi. J. and F. are just about Bishop/Knight value until the end. B. is about Rook value until the end. There is only the one strong piece made in the likeness of Conway's Angel (I think there is some Shogi near-equivalent), so in a nice artistic game, those certain statements about strengths are incongruous and frankly seeming to be wrong. This is the fun of it to find the flaws and failsafes in the fantasies.

George Duke wrote on Sat, Aug 29, 2009 03:30 PM UTC:Good ★★★★

Okay, so Benye is not requiring both diagonal and orthogonal clearance, making it more than Queen value. Maus' Cavalry has four Queen compounds on 8x8, and there are such examples of more strong pieces at once than LiQi. The disparagement is not attempted, but just the reality that there will be little play of this artwork, as Larry knows. Now the most played CV in Game Courier ever, Pocket Mutation, is hardly ever played either, by my definition. No disparagement, just the chosen way CVPage operates. Would Larry say Maojus are stronger than Rococo pawns? If they are, is it only by virtue of promotion? Just a question, to give this pretty little game some deserved attention.

Charles Gilman wrote on Sun, Aug 30, 2009 06:27 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

Interesting to see Gutenschach's Foundation¹, Theorist², and Study³ on a 2d board. The next thing, I suppose, would be to have planar pieces on a hex board, for which I have just suggested piece names right at the end of Man and Beast 15.

Notes:
¹same as Base in Prince, but name changed to avoid confusion with suffix -base meaning Man and Beast 12 downward-orientated piece.
²differs from Scientist in Prince in lacking 3d-specific Technician move.
³differs from University in Prince in lacking 3d-specific Technician move

4 comments displayed

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.