Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I like the Horse well enough to add it to my collection of Pawns:

The Index and Ox are an interesting pair. The word "index" actually comes from the Latin for the forefinger, as it's used to point and indicate something. An Index in a stone garden (or similar setting) would be a sign with arrows pointing various directions to show where other destinations can be found. So, the Index and Ox don't quite go together in their names the way they do in their moves.

I think you can relieve this my confusion (without changing the icons) by changing the Index's name to a bird, such as Kestrel or (my preference) Harrier. Such birds are not uncommon in statuary.

(Hint: I want to put those two in my collection as well! They have very interesting moves.)

…why?! (however another one GC preset is pleased)

Use Fide style chess symbols instead of these funny symbols.

For this tip, thx

You probably switched the setup section out of source-code mode when editing it. This in general destroys most HTML in the text.

Easiest is probably to re-instate an earlier revision, and then re-apply your edits while staying in source-code mode.

Help please! Diagram disappeared!

Thanks to all. But I agree to make Game Courier preset with another graphics also, such as Alpha or Merida, in settings.

Speaking of taste, I'm OK with these graphics, they remind me of those of Dobutsu Shogi made by Madoka Kitao (this is a game that is missing on the CVP by the way). Well, the Horse, Ox and Index (why such a name?) are not fantastic in my opinion. But, it's the author's choice.

On the text, I would recommend to avoid the use of he or she (e.g. she for the Raven) and use a neutral "it".

It looks an interesting game, thanks to Daniel for the GC.

It's not a duty, though. It's a supererogatory public service, and I have more important things to do than review submissions whose graphics do not meet my standards.

Or I am just more disciplined in not letting my personal feelings interfere with my duties. Eurasian Chess is a popular variant here, and should certainly not be neglected when I am providing Interactive Diagrams for variants starting with E. And I respect the original design of the authors, no matter how I feel about that.

This submission still needed some fixing, which now appears to have been done. I still did not manage to figure out how I can publish a submission, though.

That is exactly how I feel when I see an article that uses the Abstract set...

And yet you made an interactive diagram for Eurasian Chess, whose graphics are based on the Abstract set. So, I don't think you actually feel the exact same way about the Abstract set as I do about these graphics.

But this is a matter of taste, and therefore I don't think this is valid criticism.

Well, it's too bad for the author that you won't publish submissions. For me, the silly graphics are a serious roadblock, and I am not going to spend time reviewing submissions that use them.

Yes, I think it is better to delete the piece IDs in parentheses. People would assume they are the first letter of the name, and there is no reason to deviate from that.

As far as I am concerned you don't have to delete any of the images. But it is true they don't convey any additional information, as they appear in the move diagrams as well.

So I can delete piece articles in parentheses as well as bare piece graphics (not moving diagrams).

Middle arithmetic of mentions said above)

Well, that shows there is no accounting for tastes.

Anyway, I tried to shape up the English a bit (mainly w.r.t. the use of articles and gender). I did not want to change the piece names, but I do feel that where it says 'Index' it really means 'Arrow'. The piece IDs mentioned in parentheses behind the piece names do not correspond to those used in the Diagram, and it seems unnecessary and undesirable to use non-ascii characters for those. Let alone a + sign...

I like the Abstract set, I used it when I played Gross Chess in ChessV. It is still better than those Wikipedia pieces which are now everywhere.

I don't mind these graphics, too, because they indeed represent new pieces, and look fun, but their style is not in common sense for me.

That is exactly how I feel when I see an article that uses the Abstract set...

But this is a matter of taste, and therefore I don't think this is valid criticism. None of the pieces in this variant is orthodox, or even commonly used in other Chess variants, so recognizability is not an issue. The images used here are well distinguishable. Better than in some piece sets (such as Galactic). So there doesn't seem to be any objective reason for not using these pieces.

What should I do to make this published?

You could change your graphics to something more traditional, or you could wait for Ben or Greg to find the time to publish it. When I see your silly nursery school graphics, it shuts down any further interest in your game, and I choose to just ignore it.

Good day’s time. What should I do to make this published? Please answer me in next 96 hours.

Please, this variant is ready to be published.

Thanks, can you publish it please?

I made this game playable with game courier if anyone's interested in trying it.

For me the pieces look fine, so perhaps it is a matter of refreshing your browser cache. I used 250 x 250 PNG images, copied from what you uploaded here without scaling but just a bit of padding and culling to make them all of equal size. Ad the Diagram instructs the browser to demagnify that to 50 x 50. (But you can zoom in without loss of resolution.)

Thank you. So I missed out one thing.

It was in the rules but wasn’t in the pieces desc. Read about King, you’ll find.

I fixed things about horse promotions, but quality of pieces’ images on the submission’s diagram is amazing in the worst sense of it.

I think that’s bug