Custom Search

[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

# Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Earlier
Weave and Dungeon. Abstract game played on a board divided into Weave and Dungeon, with movement following different rules on each part. (9x9, Cells: 81)
George Duke wrote on 2008-04-11 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
9x9. Here's a theorem by Niels Henrik Abel (Abelian set, group, integral) on convergence of series in 1826: 0 = 1^n - 2^n + 3^n - 4^n + etc., n positive integer. Here's a poem by Mark Stroud (slashes are lines): ''In a field/ I am the absence/ of field./ This is/ always the case./ Wherever I am/ I am what is missing./ When I walk/ I part the air/ and always/ the air moves in/ to fill the spaces/ where my body's been./ We all have reasons/ for moving./ I move/ to keep things whole.'' How to slice, like apple or pizza, the 10*3 CVs from 'ECV' and 'CVP'? Any 100 of them, like Gilman's or Betza's, are 1%. To evaluate we need subsets of 10 to 200 to compare, in other words, 0.1% up to 2%. Criteria can be any of locale of invention, board size, number piece-types, power density, year invention, gender, shape, geometry, theme, number mutators, winning conditions . Take sizing's '9x9', containing about 50 CVs, 0.5%. Surprisingly there are 25 Very Good/Excellent within 9x9, a disproportionate 50%. Previously reviewed, Weave & Dungeon uniquely has Circle, Star, Triangle, Square, Pentagon, Diamond.

George Duke wrote on 2007-10-31 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Also at the top of 9x9 size, Weave and Dungeon. White Weave is like sine waves seen from above, Black Dungeon. Only the 81 squares may be occupied. ''An implied underpass[which cannot itself be occupied] is the trough of a strand located directly beneath the bridge of a cross-strand'' makes perfect sense. (White)Segments are only two or three long. Of the two motions, sliding and stepping, sliding is continuous either within Dungeon(Black) or along a strand(White). The other motion, a step, is abrupt change of altitude(there are four altitudes, but again exactly the 81 spaces). Capture being by displacement, the connectivity described is enough to differentiate the six piece-types, with some single moves allowed combining sliding and stepping both. Wins are graded hierarchically as Triumph, Ovation, or simple Victory. ''Stalemate and repetition are a loss.'' LCC's 2002 Comment still applies, ''This variant has easily the most interesting geometry I've seen.''

Dan Troyka wrote on 2006-03-24 UTC
I managed to miss the last bug report from Joost when he posted it many months ago. But I have now corrected the error and re-submitted a version 1.2.1, which hopefully will be up soon.

Joost wrote on 2004-12-20 UTC
I found another bug in the tri-weave macro (if (and (on-board? \$2) (not-friend? \$2)) (recycle) \$2 add \$3) is not right. The (recycle) is not executed at the position on which the possible capture takes place, so it has to be: (if (and (on-board? \$2) (not-friend? \$2)) \$2 (recycle) add \$3) The same correction for the same line with \$2 <--> \$3 a few lines lower.

Dan Troyka wrote on 2004-12-15 UTC
Thanks for the comments and for posting the fixes to the errors. I've sent the editors a ZRF version 1.2 correcting the two bugs you identified and giving the Diamonds the ability to advance to the far rank -- remaining a Diamond -- if there is no piece to rescue. This raises the question of whether a Diamond on a slope on the far rank should be able to rescue (assuming a piece to rescue has become available) when making a lateral capture. Currently that's not permitted.

Joost wrote on 2004-12-14 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Excellent game. The idea of a semi-3D board is very nice. I found two errors in the ZRF-file. 1. At the end of the tri-weave macro: The line before the last line missed a (recycle) else (if not-friend? (recycle) add)) instead of else (if not-friend? add)) 2. In the recycle macro also counts captured Diamonds as captured Pentagons else (if (piece? Pentagon) (counter Pentagon1 Pentagon2) )))) instead of else (counter Pentagon1 Pentagon2) ))) And one question: The ZRF-file does not allow a Diamond-move to the last rank if there is no piece to promote to. Is this correct?

Peter Aronson wrote on 2002-10-23 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Now that I've played this (Tony Quintanilla and I recently finished an e-mail game), I can say that it plays very nicely, but that the movement of the pieces takes some getting used to. This is not helped by the abstract design of the pieces, but I like the way they look so much that I'd rather not trade them for more helpful ones.

LCC wrote on 2002-10-03 UTCExcellent ★★★★★
Excellent. This variant has easily the most interesting geometry I've seen.

Anonymous wrote on 2002-09-16 UTC
I now see that my response to the question 'What happens when a Star comes back to his throne? (after cycling d2 or f2).' was off base, since I had not read the rules completely enough, and is properly answered by Mr. Troyka. I promise to be more careful before I respond in the future.

Dan Troyka wrote on 2002-09-16 UTC
The throne is just another bridge. It does not have any special significance except for grading wins. In the case of a Star circling back to its throne the player cannot claim a triumph.

M. Howe wrote on 2002-09-16 UTC
I'm not sure I understand the question 'What happens when the star returns to its throne.' The rules clearly state that once in the dungeon, the star can only move to adjacent dungeon cells and can never return to the weave, so it can therefore never return to its starting square, if that is what the questioner meant by 'throne.' At least, this is how I read the situation.

Moussambani wrote on 2002-09-16 UTC
What happens when a Star comes back to his throne? (after cycling d2 or f2). This game sounds interesting...