[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Comments/Ratings for a Single Item Later ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier⇩ Earliest⇧ Parahouse. Shogi + Strong pieces. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-26 UTCI made some edits to the Rules section, and I deleted the Notes section, because it appeared to be code that wasn't working. I don't like the idea of describing pieces only with Betza notation. While it may be used for people who do know it, English descriptions should also be included for readers, since we can't expect all readers to know Betza notation. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-25 UTCCan this be published ? Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCI see Campmate was mentioned in the comments to that video 5 months ago. Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCHere's a video on the Impasse rule. Hidetchi, who made the video, states that he doesn't like this rule, and some people have proposed replacing it with the Try rule, which says that a player can win by moving his King to the position the opponent's King started from. What you're calling Campmate is similar to this rule. Instead of just saying "No Impasse," which is kind of cryptic, you could say, "Instead of the official Shogi rule for resolving an impasse, this game can be won by Campmate, which involves moving the King to a safe space on the last rank." Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCH.G.Miller // I have spelled out the rules exactly. Is this allowed? H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCI mean that you cannot expect the typical reader to know any of the rules of Shogi. So yes, you would have to fully explain those rules, or at least those that also apply to your game. It makes little sense to explain rules just to say that they don't apply. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCH.G.Miller // Umm, so, "The rest is the same as Shogi" Do you mean to explain this sentence in more detail? H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-22 UTC For example, I don't think Shogi has an "impasse" rule. It actually does have such a rule. See for instance the Wikipedia article, which devotes an entire paragraph to it. Like 3-fold repetition impasse (= jishogi in Japanese) is both a game situation and a rule made to specify consequences for when that situation occurs. It does not make much sense to have detailed explanation of rules that the variant at had does not have. One can doubt the wisdom of using Shogi as a reference. Many articles on CVP of course use orthodox Chess as a reference, and only describe how the variant they discuss deviates from it. But I think 95+% of the visitors of CVP will be quite familiar with orthodox Chess, while to most Shogi would be something as alien as Courier Chess or Metamachy. Even for Fergus, who must know 100 times more about chess variants than the average reader, the current description was not sufficiently clear. So I would suggest to make a full rather than an incremental description of Parahouse in the Rules section. The current comparison with Shogi is then more suitable for the Notes section. This gets rid of the need to mention Pawn-drop mate and impasse, as Parahouse does not have those rules. It would have to mention that: Pieces mandatorily promote when their move starts or ends within the zone Pieces that are captured demote, change side, and get into the hand of the player that captures them Unpromoted pieces can be dropped from the hand on an empty square, instead of a normal move. Pawns cannot be dropped in a file that already contains one of the same color. The game is won by checkmating or stalemating the opponent. Perpetual checking is a loss for the checking player. (?) Other (?) 3-fold repetitions are a loss for the player that last moved. All in all that is not much longer than what you there is now. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-22 UTCBlack can also be defeated by threefold repetition. So it's not like Minishogi. Threefold repetition simply puts, 'Neither White nor Black can repeat the same situation three times.' Even if it is not repeated in succession, if the same situation is repeated twice in one game, no one can repeat the situation again. (I have annotated the rules) Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-21 UTC Perhaps it is a bit confusing that the Rules section actually doesn't give the rules, but the difference between the rules of regular Shogi and this variant. No, that much was clear. It's that some rules are not spelled out, or the rules section includes some consequences of rules that are not themselves rules. For example, I don't think Shogi has an "impasse" rule. So saying "no impasse" doesn't tell me how this game has a different rule than Shogi. H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCPerhaps it is a bit confusing that the Rules section actually doesn't give the rules, but the difference between the rules of regular Shogi and this variant. While that becomes only clear from the last remark. It could be better to start with stating "The rules are the same as for Shogi, except:", and than mention the other 5 points. A consequence of the rules of regular Shogi is that a game where both Kings reach the enemy camp is usually impossible to win by checkmate for eithher player. It therefore has a special rule to decide the game in that case. The campmate rule here is an alternative way of deciding the game in this case. It is still not clear to me what "3-fold repetition is impossible" means. Is it forbidden to make a move that repeats an earlier position? Does white lose (as in mini-Shogi)? Such rule are usually very unsatisfactory, even when perpetual checking is made an exception where the checker loses. Because you can often force a large material gain by chasing a piece until it is no longer allowed to repeat. Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCI am unfamiliar with the word campmate. Did you coin it or get it from someplace else? Since your rules still say "No Impasse(=Jishogi)", I should point out that there is a difference between a rule and a consequence of your rules. For example, Metamorphin' Fusion Chess has rules that allow players to promote simple pieces and to split apart compound pieces, and one consequence of these rules is that reproduction of pieces is possible. Generally, a rule should be written out as a complete sentence, and it should concern itself with specific actions a player may or may not take. A consequence of the rules is not itself a rule, and to avoid confusion, consequences of the rules should be covered in the Notes section, not in the Rules section. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCThis is also the same as Dobutsu Shogi's special victory conditions H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCOK, clear. That is what I would call a delayed winning condition (like King baring in Shatranj): it only wins if it is certain you would survive the following move of the opponent. A more compact way of saying that is: " The player whose King reaches 9th rank without stepping into check first wins. " Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCAt any time, the King cannot move to a square attacked by his opponent's piece. So the King should only move legally. For example, if your opponent's Rook is holding the last rank, your King cannot Campmate unless you capture that Rook or block the Rook's attack. (Because King cannot reach last rank by Rook.) H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCYou have not written that in your article, and it is not obvious. Because a King can usually 'commit suicide' when that ends the game. If I capture the opponent King, I don't have to worry whether that leaves my own King in check. If that was not the case it would be legal to step with your King next to the opponent's King when you are protected. Because he would not be allowed to capture you with that King, so you would not be in check. You cannot be in check after the game has ended. It would also be legal to step your King into the range of an enemy piece that is pinned to its own King. As that piece would not attack you, since it is pinned. It always has to be specified explicitly whether a game-terminating condition must be fulfilled by a legal move, or whether a pseudo-legal move suffices. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCA King cannot commit suicide. (i.e. the King cannot move to a square attacked by an opponent's piece.) Therefore, Campmate is only established when the king is not attacked by an opponent's piece. The player who made the Campmate first wins. H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCYou should specify whether this is an immediate winning condition (like capturing a King), or a delayed one (which could still be trumped by capturing that King on the last rank, in an 'after-move'). Or, in other words, whether the move to last rank must be legal (= avoid stepping into check). This is especially important since regular Shogi does not really have a checking rule like Chess; exposing your King to capture just loses the game, rather than qualifying as an illegal move that has to be retracted to continue the game from there. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-21 UTCH.G.Miller // I added Campmate. and there is still no Impasse(=Jishogi). Campmate : The player who moved his king on the last rank wins. H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-20 UTCI don't think that would help enough to prevent the impasse. The defending pieces also don't go mostly forward. When you build a fortress of Tokins in the opponent's camp in Shogi, the Tokins are looking away from the direction that the attack is coming from. But you have a point; it should be established by play testing whether impasse in this variant would be a problem that begs for a rule to solve it. Aurelian Florea wrote on 2022-05-20 UTCHG, But in this game pieces don't go "mostly forward", so dropping jishogi makes sense. H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-20 UTCJishogi is the rule that when both Kings have reached the opponent camp, the games is a draw (or decided by material count). But abolishing that rule is similar to abolishing the rule that 3-fold repetition is a draw in Chess. The latter won't make perpetuals less common in games, and continuing those forever achieves nothing. Likewise, abolishing the jishogi rule won't make the problem go away that it is very easy to defend a King once it is the enemy camp. Fergus Duniho wrote on 2022-05-20 UTC Impasse means 'Jishohi' in Shogi What does Jishohi mean? I do not speak Japanese, nor do most of our readers. Please spell out the rule of no impasse in practical details. Daphne Snowmoon wrote on 2022-05-20 UTCThen I'll modify the rule H. G. Muller wrote on 2022-05-20 UTCFrom the rules it seems to me like there will be an impasse in this game, when both Kings reach the enemy camp. In the sense that the game becomes unwinnable because the players will surround their Kings with an impenetrable fortress of promoted Pawn protecting each other multiple times. You just dropped the rule for handling this situation satisfactorily. I doubt that this is a good thing. 25 comments displayedLater ⇩Reverse Order⇧ Earlier⇩ Earliest⇧Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.