Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
|
Hi Fergus Yes, 3-fold repetition is a draw in Sac Chess. I had assumed (apparently incorrectly) that somehow by the form to enter a submission on CVP, and by some instances I looked at of other submitted variants that have been played, that a submitted variant has the same basic or auxilary rules as standard chess, unless otherwise stated by the inventor, at least if the variant seems clearly intended to be chess-like (Shogi & Chinese Chess variants for example, would be another story). Thus, by another rule of standard chess, Sac Chess would also have agreed draws allowed (which Game Courier assumes for all variants), and also the 50 move rule that is used in chess (with some modern exceptions that make the rule to be for 100 moves instead according to FIDE, e.g. R+B+K vs. R+K, and many semi-specified positions with 2N+K vs.P+K, the latter of which, however, clearly couldn't be applied to Sac Chess' 10x10 board). I was actually wondering recently if the 50 move rule should be applied to larger board variants than 8x8, since even B+N+K vs. K might take more than 50 moves in the worse case with good play on 10x10, though I doubt it will in that particular basic endgame, or others that might arise in Sac Chess. In general it's a bit tedious for inventors to try to cope with or unfailingly anticipate every little rule case that might come up. A solution could be simply to state in one of one's CVP submissions that the basic rules of chess apply unless otherwise stated, but that might have caused some confusion in the case of Sac Chess, as you can see from the above rule cases, if I didn't still take the trouble to elaborate at length on them as I have above. I'd say if any variant ever becomes popular enough, any future governing body it would have (like FIDE is to chess) might later fine-tune the rules or clarify rule omissions/ambiguities made by the inventor. At least on Game Courier, the players afaik seem to sort out such rule issues without much trouble, or perhaps even consult the inventor as here. I would observe that some variant submissions, even of old variants that might even be played on Game Courier, have an author's comment that certain rules aren't made clear by the inventor, and in such cases iany rule enforcing preset programmers can decide on the exact rules they enforce in their presets. I don't know if Carlos took into account any of the rule cases (3 fold draw, 50 move rule) that I discussed at length above as they apply to the Sac Chess rule-enforcing preset that you're currently using, but if you care to you might assume for now he did not.
On a personal note, I'd intended to stop playing on Game Courier for at least the summer (if not longer) due to, not least, having no air conditioner (just a fan) in the room where my 'playstation' is in my small apartment, but I'm now looking into the chance of having an affordable and practical portable air conditioner. Kevin |
Sac Chess still seems to be holding up well in practical testing on Game Courier, I'm happy to see.
A while back I toyed with the idea of making novel spinoff variant(s) that included the use of N+Guard+Bishop (technically NWB) compound pieces (I've called them Freemasons) and also what I've called Ships, that is N+Guard+Rook (technically NFR) compound pieces (using either an 8x10 or 12x12 board). I had, subsequent to inventing Sac Chess, had the feeling these two triple compound pieces perhaps ought to have been included in a Sac Chess-like game, somehow, as they perhaps logically complete the set of thematic compound pieces added to the standard FIDE piece types. On the other hand, there seems to be no precedent for the use of these triple compound piece types in previously fairly-widely played CVs, e.g. shogi includes the promoted B & R types, at least, while I recall Amazons had been fairly popular, in a variant of chess played in Russia long(?) ago - even centaurs have been employed (Courier-Spiel). So, I don't feel the urge to use the Freemason and Ship compounds as strongly as I once did, as I now see Sac Chess clearly uses the 'classic' compound pieces, as Carlos once put it.
A side issue arising from all this that occured to me is: what values should the Freemason and Ship piece types have? If we note that computer studies place Archbishops (let alone Chancellors) very close to a Q in value, and also place Amazon=Q+N in value (only), at least on 8x8, there doesn't seem much room to put Freemasons and Ships between Archbishops (or Chancellors) and Amazons on a numerical value scale, one might guess (at first thought anyway). I'm not sure what I'd speculate any future computer studies might (approximately) give for the values of Freemasons or Ships, but my own tentative valuation of an Amazon (as =Q+N+P) gives more room to fit Freemasons and Ships on a values scale (e.g. for armies on 8x8 or 10x10), at least. [edit: Fwiw, for 10x10 my own tentative estimates place Chancellor=N+R+P=3+5.5+1=9.5; Amazon=Q+N+P=10+3+1=14 and Ship=(N+F+P)+R+P=(3+0.75+1)+5.5+1=11.25, for example; if I only changed the value of an Amazon, to be equal to Q+N=10+3=13, then its value would seemingly be too close to that of a Ship's.]
I can't believe this game hasn't been reviewed yet. This is the best game I've played that includes an Amazon. I normally leave the Amazon out of my games, because it has the power to force checkmate by itself, and that has the potential to wreak a game. However, that hasn't been a problem with this game. This game includes several other weaker compound pieces that help make it unsafe to move the Amazons out too early. To get to the point where you could use an Amazon to force checkmate against a King, you have to do lots of maneuvering of other pieces. Furthermore, the potential of the Amazon getting a bead on the King means that position is sometimes more important than material advantage. You can't count on winning just because you are ahead materially. If you find that you can't stop your opponent's Amazon, you may lose even if you're materially ahead. This makes the game more dynamic and exciting.
Hello Greg,
I would like to know if there is any way to access the set of pieces that ChessV uses for Sac Chess, that is, to which group does it belong and the name of the particular set?
I am looking to change in the current preset of Sac Chess the image of the zebra for the most appropriate of the knight/guard.
H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Jun 27, 2020 12:57 PM EDT:And why the strange piece IDs, that seem to be totally unrelated to the piece name? 'T' for Amazon, 'G' for Sailor??? And what the heck is a 'disjunctive compound'? Is there more than one type of compound?
Sissa is a compound of rook and bishop but its move is not disjunctive, it is conjunctive.
Conjunctive = A and B
Disjunctive = A or B
Am I right?
Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Jun 27, 2020 02:52 PM EDT:I can definitely make a custom piece set for Sac so that the Centaur is properly represented. Regarding H.G.'s question why the pieces have strange notations, I am guessing it is because this game does not have a custom piece set, so Kevin used whatever notation was associated with an appropriate graphic in the existing Game Courier piece set that came closest.
Since I'm making a new piece set anyway, we can improve the notations as well, but that's up to Kevin.
Thanks Greg. I would suggest that players could choose customize the piece set between abstract and alfaerie.
The one who edited the preset in use was me with some guidance from Fergus.
@ Greg:
I don't mind, as long as Carlos is happy (the presets for Sac Chess were made by him). Just as long as previously finished or ongoing game logs of Sac Chess are not somehow broken when the changeover to a new set is made, hopefully.
H. G. Muller wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 08:50 AM EDT:Sissa is a compound of rook and bishop but its move is not disjunctive, it is conjunctive.
Conjunctive = A and B
Disjunctive = A or B
Am I right?
I have never seen the word 'compound' used in sequential meaning; I would say the Sissa is an (isosceles) hook mover. And I would not say the Tai Shogi Hook Mover is a (conjunctive) compound of two Rooks. The word 'or' usually implies 'and', and if you consider this operations on the move sets, the 'conjunctive compound' of R and B would have no moves (as B and R have no moves in common), and the conjunctive compound of K and R would be the Wazir, etc. There doesn't seem a case where this cumbersome way of describing more elementary move sets is useful, as they tend to all have simple names of their own. Note that the Sissa can neither move as a Rook, nor as a Bishop.
It seems to me the addition of 'disjunctive' serves no other purpose here then sow confusion in a case that otherwise would be correctly understood with 100% certainty.
I have never seen the word 'compound' used in sequential meaning; I would say the Sissa is an (isosceles) hook mover. And I would not say the Tai Shogi Hook Mover is a (conjunctive) compound of two Rooks. The word 'or' usually implies 'and', and if you consider this operations on the move sets, the 'conjunctive compound' of R and B would have no moves (as B and R have no moves in common), and the conjunctive compound of K and R would be the Wazir, etc. There doesn't seem a case where this cumbersome way of describing more elementary move sets is useful, as they tend to all have simple names of their own. Note that the Sissa can neither move as a Rook, nor as a Bishop.
It seems to me the addition of 'disjunctive' serves no other purpose here then sow confusion in a case that otherwise would be correctly understood with 100% certainty.
Thank you very much, HG, for the clarification. Soon I will make the correction in what corresponds to the Sac Chess preset. It will take more time to do it in other texts because they are many.
What is paradoxical and anecdotal about this case is that I believed that making that distinction introduced clarity!
In passing, it should be borne in mind that 90% of what I write in English is "formatted" [written, thought, said] by the Google translator.
Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 01:25 PM EDT:Ok, I have created a set group for Sac Chess with two Alfaerie options and an Abstract set option. These use the proper notations for Sac Chess so be sure to update the game courier presets and change the settings name so that existing game logs don't get broken.
Note for Fergus: The graphics Kevin has used for dragon horse and dragon king may not be correct. The cross within the graphic usually represents royal pieces but I don't see any other options for these pieces.
@Greg,
Thank you very much!
@Kevin,
The new preset page is already updated. Please let me know if you want us to write any particular text there. You don't have to worry about past game logs being affected because I have used another settings name.
Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 04:56 PM EDT:You're welcome.
The key at the bottom that describes the pieces shows Alfaerie images. So I think the preset should default to Alfaerie, particularly since the dragon king/dragon horse are non-standard. A player can switch to abstract if he desires.
H. G. Muller wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 05:15 PM EDT:Some sections are very poorly formatted; even the images are just part the lines. And division into paragraphs is sorely missing in a very long text.
Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 05:32 PM EDT:The formatting probably got messed up somewhere along the way. It can happen with the editor if you aren't careful. Fortunately, now that revisions are saved, it will be possible to go back if it happens ...
H. G. Muller wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020 05:53 PM EDT:Yeah, I know. I have to be very careful never to switch off 'Source code', once I have started to do advanced things. Or they would all simply disappear. Embedded JavaScript disappears completely, Diagram definitions become line-filling text, the 'id' names of HTML elements are all forgotten...
@Greg,
The key at the bottom that describes the pieces shows Alfaerie images.
So is. I already corrected it. I even put links to the three presets separately so that the player who is going to launch an invitation can choose the one he/she likes.
@ Carlos:
Looks good, thanks!
@ Greg:
The Sac Chess rules page is not the only submission of mine that has gotten messed up, due to some formatting changes to CVP's database perhaps. I wasn't in a hurry to draw attention to all of those submissions, in case the onus somehow fell on me to modify what used to be well-formatted submissions of mine.
You are welcome, Kevin.
The formatting issues seem to have been fixed. It only remains to mention that the available presets are three.
Yes, it appears the formatting issues with all my submissions that were messed up previously (somehow) have been nicely resolved, by one or more of the editors it may well be.
The only possible exception might be with the Notes Section of my Full House Hexagonal Chess rules page - unfortunately I cannot recall if I left sparse/no spacing between what perhaps should be independent paragraphs in the Notes section to that rules page, so perhaps fixing it further, if it should be fixed further, might take some guesswork or arbitrary editing.
I slightly edited the rules page for Sac Chess, by noting in the introduction that there are (now) 3 rules enforcing presets available.
Unfortunately, it seems the Sac Chess rules page formatting has become messed up, once more.
I just unchecked Uses HTML for you. You should check that only if you are completely depending on HTML to describe your page's formatting.
Okay, thanks. I hadn't realized the implications of that default checkbox.
Incidentally, Tim O'Lena recently submitted a couple of Zog-related submissions to be looked over by editor(s), in case you missed that.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Is 3-times repetition a draw? That's what I'm presently going for in a game I'm playing.