Ratings & Comments
I touched up this page and added some graphics. I used piece images from the Alfaerie: Many set, but the Blacksmith may be a new piece, and I'm not sure if that set includes anything that would be appropriate. Does anyone have a suggestion for what would be appropriate?
Hey, Christine. The original piece set had the "+" on the wazir, but not the "x" on the high priestess. You did the H.P. icon with the "x", and I believe I at one time substituted that into the piece set, but if so, it fell out again. I have no idea whatsoever how the wazir lost its "+". All I can figure is someone went into the GtS piece set and changed that piece. I did not!
Published. The page linked to mentions a different inventor for this game than this page does. Are they the same person? Who should be credited as the inventors of this game?
I have edited the indexmaint/edititem.php script to use datalists instead of select lists. Since multiple fields can share the same datalist, this makes the script quicker to download. Since it will narrow down the values of the datalist as you type, this will make it easier to get to the right value. Since it will now allow you to enter values that are not in the datalist, I have removed all the fields for entering new values. All these did was copy their values to the strings created for the select lists. Just in case of any problems, I backed up the previous version of the script as oldedititem.php.
Thank you. I understand. I have asked Hans, maybe he will remember. Maybe not, we will see.
In next future, I will try to obtain the correspondance between Gollon and Cohen.
Your comment said that RennChess was “a follow up of Mideast Chess” — if so then it would make sense that Eric would not keep the Cavalier's name but change the move. Thus his understanding of Mideast probably agreed with Pritchard, which would mean that Gollon also agreed (in both sources, if different). In that case Hans' page has an error introduced either by a typo from Eric, or by Hans.
Given that that move is probably erroneous, it makes sense to either remove the reference, or keep it but with a note that it's probably in error. In the latter case, calling it “Hans' account” could risk reflecting badly on him, even though (of course) that is not the intent. Fwiw, “These pages' account” risks the same directed at ourselves(!), while “one account” or “some accounts” is quite unspecific (and the latter may be incorrect if ours is the only such).
Hope that's clearer — English is very much one of my mother tongues (though sometimes I wonder whether it'd be more interesting if it weren't), as is indirection/terseness it would seem ;)
@H.G., does the 'great' variant in the CECP spec refer to the "D" variant of Great Shatranj?
@Bn Em. I fear a miscommunication. Sorry, English is not my mother language, you sentence is long and not direct enough for my poor English >> I"m not sure about what you mean.
What I know or understand:
- Cavalier in Renn Chess, Greenwood: is F-then-R or R-then-F, but not an adjacent
- Cavalier in Mideast according to Pritchard: it is the same than above.
- Cavalier in Mideast according to Hans: is F-then-R or W-then-B, but not an adjacent
I said that Greenwood took the Cavalier from Mideast, and this is true only if Pritchard is right and Hans is wrong. Pritchard seemed to be quite certain of what he wrote because he said that then the Cavalier has always two paths to reach a square.
My point is not an offense to my friend Hans, of course.
Maybe worth to mention that there are two versions of the move depending on the source.
It's not terribly clear given that the diagram lacks horizontal separators between ranks (instead using one text line per rank), but the pawns start (as written below the diagram) on the 3rd rank, not the second.
Though I'm a bit curious as to why 3 generals rather than the more obvious two?
Each player has 3 blacksmiths beside the board when the game starts. The first move consists of placing all 3 blacksmiths on the player’s second rank.
Considering that each player's second rank is already filled by Pawns, does this mean that Blacksmiths replace three Pawns on each side?
Thanks, Fergus!
@Jean‐Louis: Hmm, in that case it does seem like Hans was in error, esp. if, as you say, RennChess was a followup to Mideast which would suggest that Greenwood had the (putatively) correct description. It may be worth taking the reference back out then given that the otherwise necessary explicit caveat regarding Hans' account might reflect unnecessarily harshly.
@H. G.: Fair; I'll put that in the notes section. Do you think it's worth generally adopting Gilman's additional ‘Double’ term as well for the Duke?
I also remembered one more variant featuring the manticore as iirc a knight upgrade, but haven't found it again [Edit: just found it], and I also found this one with a lame double‐ski (i.e. at least 3‐square) manticore move as one form of the ‘mutating serpent’. Oþoh I feel like this page may well be more than comprehensive enough as it is(!)
Also since I expect to make at least one more revision of this, I seem to remember there's a preference for relative urls in intra‐site links; am I correct in thinking that those are the same as absolute ones but without the leading https://www.chessvariants.com
?
Hi Kevin, yes, I'm having a fun game of Sky with Carlos at the moment. I see your playing Joe at Great Shatranj, good luck there, hope you win lol. I'm joking, hope you both draw hehe. I see it's a close game.
I do notice though, the HightPriestess (alfil knight fers) could have a more precise graphic, the one like you using now but has the fers symbol on it. Also, the Warmachine (dabbaba wazir) or Wazaba piece could have a more precise piece graphic too, the one with wazir symbol on it. But it's all ok if you know what is happening.
@Greg
I don't think 75% can be explained by random noise, for something that was meant to be around 50%.
Hi Christine
Yes, I'm an (aging) master (by national title, no longer by [Canadian] rating). In spite of that it's not always easy for me to play good moves in chess variants, especially ones that are not much like chess. Carlos is about as strong as me at anything like chess, I'd guess.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
I had not found that link on the bottom. Thank you Greg.
Sorry, I missed that important point. Btw, no "e" in my name :=)
By the way, the variant (with en passant allowed) is available to play on chess.com: https://www.chess.com/variants/fog-of-war
Here's an animation of the game:
https://lichess.org/study/WjUgZzpG
I like black's idea on the final move (Rh2! hoping to provoke Kg1), however white called the bluff.
I think it is likely that the results are weird because at only 100 games the error margin is high. Testing is time-consuming, so it is tempting to stop a test early based on initial results, but if you do that you do not have an accurate measurement and are responding to noise.
@Greg Strong For the alfil enhancement I used 512 games. For the other two I've stopped around 100. That is beacuse I had though the results to be weird.
@Jean-louis Cazaux In apothecary chess Clasic the knight may also move as a zebra but not capture. In apothecary chess Modern the knight may also leap 3 orthogonally or move as an alfil, but not capture. These are too strong enhancements. I am trying to get to something that will keep the knight and bishop equal.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
The Blacksmith occurs in Chu Shogi as Horizontal Mover. There is a 'Chu-Shogi Western' page that uses an Alfaerie symbol for it.