Kibbitz Listing
wrote on When rule enforcement is added, it should be added to a new preset with a different settings name so existing logs don't break. We then make the new preset the one we advertise so people use it for new games.
wrote on There is a problem with this preset - I'm in checkmate but it's not detected. I tried to enter 'lost' but that is refused as well.
wrote on Whoops! Guess that would explain why it's not working!
Thanks, David.
wrote on Help! I'm stuck! This rule-enforcing preset is broken and it's not letting me castle. Does anyone have access to fix the code, or to turn off rule enforcement?
wrote on This preset is broken; I can't castle
wrote on Sure! Just send an invite to my username: mageofmaple. Any pairing of the four 'classic' armies is fine with me.
wrote on Vitya,
I saw your comment about the power of the CWDA pieces. I agree almost
completely, except that I would bump the FAD up to 4 pawns.
Regards,
Greg
wrote on What happened here? It looks like pieces have suddenly changed (both placement and icon.)
wrote on If you want to play this game with a King's Leap, I like Joe's suggestion, unmoved king jumps directly to corner squares a1 or p1 (for White) best, of course not allowed if in check...
wrote on Hmmm... so, how do the black pieces move?
wrote on Since this game has been idle for a while, this is a reminder to all that
this is an open-kibbitz game; anyone may comment on any aspect of the game
in progress. In fact, observations and suggestions are appreciated. The
goal is to have, when we are finished, the record of a very high-level
error-free game that can be studied.
In this position, I'm inclined to develop the other knight (g8) to e7,
declaring anti-check. It might be better to make a stronger developing
move, though... Perhaps I'm just too eager to declare anti-check :)
wrote on I don't know what is going on here... I very specifically deleted all
rule-enforcement code from this preset. I am sure of it. And now, there
it is... I can only assume that it is some continuation of the
file-write-security problems that the site had for quite a while there
(and maybe still does.)
Can someone with appropriate access kill all rule enforcement code from
this preset?
wrote on Actually, now when I go back and look at my NoRules settings for this game, the rules are back! I don't know what's going on, but I can only assume we still have file permission problems at the very least.
wrote on Hmmm... I seem to be unable to make the move f1-c4... It says funciton T is undefined, but I'm pretty sure I cleared out all rule-enforcement code. Not sure what's going on here...
wrote on <p>Thomas, I completely agree with you that a ruling on your present situation should be based purely on the rules as written, as you were playing the game with those rules in mind. The 'deeper intent' of the inventor should not be relevant, except in-so-far as that intent is clearly stated in the rules.</p>
<p>My opinion: I have read the rules multiple times now, carefully, with attention focused on the present question, and it would be my opinion that the move you made is illegal. There may be a tiny bit of ambiguity, but not much IMHO. I think that the language that specifically explains the ring board should be given the heaviest weight, and I think this sentence mostly clears it up:<blockquote>A piece may only end up on an edge square by making a capturing move that would not be possible without landing on the edge square.</blockquote></p>
<p>It has been argued that this is still vague, but I don't think so. The alternate interpretation that you cannot land on an edge square unless it is impossible to make the capture without landing on <i>any</i> edge square is a different statement, and that's just not how I read it. I would also point out in the Notes and Comments section of the Rococo page, the author discusses the intent behind the ring board:<blockquote>The edge squares were to avoid pieces being able to hide from Long Leapers around the edges.</blockquote>Allowing you to go all the way into the corner when it is not necessary allows you to hide from capture by Long Leapers better than otherwise, and that clearly violates the stated intension of the ring board.</p>
<p>On a related matter, I find Fergus' comment puzzling and somewhat distressing. Fergus said:<blockquote>The last thing Peter said on this matter was 'the LL could leap to x1 to capture at x2, but not leap to x0 to capture at x2.' So take back the move and get on with your game.</blockquote>Fergus completely ignored the fact that Peter said that the rule was unclear, and he did not address any of Thomas' points. He just issued a very blunt command instead. I find it interesting that Fergus is willing to type out pages and pages of intelligent discourse with a certain symmetry-buff long after it was clear that the other party wasn't making and sense and no one else cared, but yet he can't be bothered to type more than two sentences slapping down Thomas McElmurry on an important tournament-related matter.</p>
wrote on I cannot move in this game. I get the error:
Syntax Error on line 185.
Z*4e is not a valid expression, because Z*4e is not a recognized piece,
coordinate, command, or subroutine.
wrote on Oops! Sorry, I forgot that the Queen was the royal piece.
Also, I really don't blame Hans for having difficulty with this game; I
also was very concerned about this game because I'm not that good at CVs
anyway, and this game has 4 knight-riders, 4 dabbabah-alfil-riders, and 4
cannon-type pieces, all of which are extremely hard to visualize. I *did*
vote for the inclusion of this game, because it looks like a really neat
game which clearly deserves more study/play. I did not rank it in my top
12, however, because it is just so far beyond my level of skill. If Hans
had offered a draw instead of resigning, I would have accepted.
wrote on Actually, I was planning on moving my anti-king to c3, so putting the pawn there is probably a really good move. I think I want to keep the king ahead of the pawns. I'm not sure whether I should move the anti-king now, (probably to d4) or not. If I do not, I will be forced to do so next move when Tony develops the bishop. Otherwise, I'd probably play p e7-e6, or g7-g6.
wrote on oh, good. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't confused about the rules :)
The reasonable responces seem to be e7-e5 or c7-c5. I need to consider
some; the fact that both of our Queen's Pawns are pinned sure upsets the
opening theorey...
wrote on I think the comments should be posted as early as possible, so that your
advice may be considered. The goal, as I understand it, is to have as
high-level a game as possible because of maximum input.
The value of the pieces is obviously important in this game. George Duke
suggested these values on Jan 30th, 2004: Immobilizer 10, Advancer 8, LL
7, Swapper 5, Chameleon 4, Withdrawer 3, Cannon Pawn 2. Anyone have an
alternate view of piece values?
wrote on I thought I understood Anti-King, but now I suspect that one of us has things backwards... Your goals 3 and 4: '3) continuing threat of the opposing Anti-King, 4) isolating the friendly Anti-King' but this is the opposite of how I understand the rules. You said that 1. P e2-e4 is good because it maintains the attack on the anti-king, but as I understand the game, the goal is exactly the opposite. You don't want to attack my upside-down King ... (I think)
wrote on To all interested parties:
Paul Grosemans and I are Chess players trying to make the transition to
the world of Shogi. We both have read 'Shogi for Beginners' by John
Fairbairn. We have agreed to play the opening sequence, of the
classification 'static rook vs. static rook', as described beginning on
page 81. So, however the game turns out, at least the opening will be
well-played :) I will post more on this game later, as I learn things
worthy of mention ...
wrote on There are problems with the way this preset enforces the rules. At the moment, it will not let me make my only legal move because it says I would be moving into check.
wrote on When you say that black was supposed to play 6. ... Lion j8-j6, do you mean that black should have played that to avoid the opening trap, or do you mean that it fell into the trap even worse than expected? To put it another way, what do you think is the first bad move black made, and what move would have been better? I will use this information to add to the opening book, ensuring that, at least, it doesn't make this particular mistake again...
wrote on To anyone who may be watching this, here's what's going on...
The game is Lions and Unicorns Chess, a new game from David Paulowich. It
puts Lions and Unicorns (from Unicorn Great Chess) onto the 80-square
board. The King castles with the Rooks by sliding two squares either way.
The pawns promote to Unicorn, Queen, or Chancellor only.
In this game, David Paulowich is playing White, but consulting with
Zillions of Games as he sees fit, but primarily as a blunder detector.
Although I am controlling the Black pieces, the moves will all be
determined (exclusively) by ChessV, set to a fixed I-Depth of 9.
wrote on <p>Yes, it was great fun to play a game in a couple of days! Of course, I'm an unemployed part-time student at the moment, so I have lots of time on my hands. I suspect that there would be less people signing up for the Game Courier tournament if it had a much stricter time-limit, even if it was only one game at a time. Real-life may just be too chaotic ... I do wish I had known about <a href='http://www.chessvariants.com'>chessvariants.com</a> in time to get in on that tournament.</p>
<p>I think your analysis of this game is right on the money... I got the jump on you because you were a little switch-happy in the early game. Actually, when I first programmed ChessV for this game, I kept starting games, and it just wasn't switching at all, so I kept aborting the game early, thinking that the program was broken. Turns out, ChessV was not broken at all; it just doen't see any advantage in switching in the early-game. By the end-game, though, switching is very deadly, and allows for much greater pawn-promotion potential.</p>
wrote on oh, no problem! This is my first CWDA game (against a human at least), and
I'm having a hard time visualizing things myself ...