Comments by BobGreenwade
House of Staunton Chess Variant Kits. Photos of Chess variant pieces sold by the House of Staunton.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]It's worth pointing out that House of Staunton no longer sells these, either directly or through Amazon. The Chess Shop of North Carolina, care of eBay, does still have them, including some newer sets (among them, much to my delight, a few packages of 16 alternative pawns).
Vanguard Chess. Game on 16x16 board, with 48 pieces per player. (16x16, Cells: 256) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Well, I think this game is ready to post now.
I've altered the text to reflect the feedback here. (I think I got it all; I lost the edits, and tried to redo them, so I might have missed one or two.) It's all quite good; I especially appreciate the points on the Lioneer (I hadn't looked closely enough at the Chu Shogi Lion), Lancer, and position of colorbound pieces.
Regarding that last item, I'm switching the Falconer and Spy, and the Lancer and Lioneer. Besides giving better balance (no, that wasn't intentional), the new positions seem more logical from a "character" perspective.
I'll have to wait for another day (probably Thursday) to mess with correcting the graphics (including the layout example), but I'll lean toward more traditional symbols. (The flipped horse for the Nightrider still really bugs me -- though on the other hand, I hadn't found a proper symbol for the Lancer until about 10 minutes ago, and wouldn't have if you hadn't spoken up about it.) I'll post here when that's done.
In addition to the change in the Lancer's move, I'd appreciate a good look at the changes I'm considering for Archer and Tank (in the Notes section).
I've changed the icons (and, as stated, a couple of positions) on the Setup board. If this passes muster with you guys, I can start the more laborious work on the individual pieces' graphics. (Including the Archer and Tank, depending on what you think of the proposed changes to their moves.)
I'm correcting most of your points, but addressing these here:
General: I've tried rewording this (again). Hopefully it's clear enough now; if not, I'm not sure how to better explain it. "Moves orthogonally an even number of spaces"?
Lancer: After your point on how little of the board this piece can reach, I've changed the moves to an "and/or" option; in addition to those shown on the outdated move diagram, it can move two spaces in any direction. I simply haven't updated any of the move diagrams because, as I indicated, I'm waiting to see if you think the icons on the new layout board look right (as well as the different Archer and Tank move/captures).
Nightrider: Same point about my waiting to update the move diagrams.
Pawn: I haven't been able to remember the proper term for Row 16 for White/Row 1 for Black.
Wizard: Reread the description. It's stated that the Wizard here "does not jump" (emphasis added).
I'm not sure how to diagram the Archer's outer moves. The Archer can slide to the second square, or jump there if it's capturing.
And thanks for the term for the "every other square," HG.
In Parlett's notation (as expanded on in the Wikipedia article, and as far as I understand it), the Archer is 1-2X,c~2X (pending decision on the move change), and the General is nX,2+&.
Similarly, the Lancer was originally (4,2), but has become 2✴,(4,2). I just haven't updated the move graphic.
I had thought to put a Parlett's notation (I have a little trouble understanding Betza) with each piece, as well as a point score for those who care about such things.
HG: Should I just use the plain dot for those spaces, then? Or would it be better to just ditch that entirely, and go straight to the alternate?
Aurelian: 3+,~(4,2) for the Lancer? That could work. I'd also consider ~(4,2),c2-3✴ (the original long leap, but can also capture 2-3 spaces away (non-leaping) in any direction, making the piece no longer colorbound).
Open: Since nothing's been said about the new icons on the Setup board, I think I'll assume that they're fine, and start updating the move illustrations as soon as we iron out the Archer, Lancer, and Tank.
And what about the Tank alternate?
Yes, that's much clearer for the Wizard. Thank you.
Attempting to translate some of the preceding information to Betza's notation:
The Lancer as Aurelian suggests is W3(4,2), while my counter idea is m(4,2)cDH.
The Archer is currently F2cA; the alternate (using one of the extensions from the Wikipedia article) is mF2[crM](2,1). Right now I'm thinking to use the Alternate, simply because it's easier to diagram. (If I do, I'll probably also use the alternate for the Tank.)
I'm not even sure how to notate either of the Tank's two options.
Responding roughly in order:
Chancellor: Ah, OK -- the Rook/Knight icon. I'll switch that up.
Princess: Use the Bishop/Knight icon for that. Got it.
I'll go change both of those ASAP. I trust those are the only incorrect icons on the board?
Archer: HG: That is indeed a much better wording. Thank you! Jean-Louis: In XBetza, [crM] indicates capture without moving. The applet (thank you very much for that!) can give me a mnB2cN for most of the listing; I'd have to change the c to [crM] to make it mnB2[crM]N. Similarly, I can get mRcNcZ for the Tank's alternative, but I have to manually make it mR[crM]N[crM]Z to indicate non-moving captures. (Also, I'm thinking of adding [crM]C.)
Lion: The lion can simply move one space (unless, of course, that space is occupied by a friendly piece). Basically, it moves like a King, but can then take a second turn. (I think I should also note in the text description that, unless it's surrounded, it can move to an adjacent square and back, effectively becoming a Pass.) I don't want it to be able to jump, though. Would that make it KmcaK?
Lancer: What I'm proposing, I think, would be notated as mDYcnDcnAcnHcnG.
side note: You guys are definitely making this a better game.
Jean-Louis: You now understand the Archer. The confusion is part of why I'm leaning toward switching to the alternate moves for it and the Tank. (They would move normally, but "shoot" to capture.)
Just seeing if these icons are acceptable for the Chancellor and (especially) Princess.
Good analysis, HG, and thanks for setting me straight on the rifle capture notation. If I have it right, a Knight-like rifle capture would be cabN.
The current Archer being apparently confusing, I'm thinking to still use the Knight's rifle capture for it, but maybe extend its non-capturing move to 3 spaces (diagonally) so it isn't so slow? (I'd add a rule that it can't capture on the turn right after moving, or can only capture in the directions adjacent to its most recent move, or something like that, but I think it would overcomplicate things.)
As to the Tank, I think I'll ditch both of the current options just go with the Machine's more traditional WD (or WDH in recognition of the board's size) and switch its starting spot with the Rook's.
I've updated a couple of things now:
- The Tank is now just a simple WDH.
- I updated the Setup with new icons, but I'm still not 100% sure about the Princess, General, or Nightrider.
- I removed all the stuff about icons, setup, and alternate moves from the Notes (leaving just one sentence).
(I could not find the usual "Knight with a Rook hat" icon on the list, nor any better Knight/Bishop combo than the one I used.)
I've made a mini-board for illustration purposes; I'm not sure I understand your notation.
- Chancellor: I don't understand. The one I have there is literally a Rook and a Knight.
- General: You mean the axe, or the shield?
- Lancer: Am I getting these suggestions right? The one I'm using may be a spear rather than a lance, but it does seem more suggestive of the job (at least, to me).
- Nightrider: I had thought to use this Pegasus, but I wasn't sure it was appropriate. I'll go ahead, then.
- Princess: HG seemed to be against this one in a. I'm checking that I read your coordinates right; if so, I'll go with column c.
- If these are the ones you mean, I really prefer medieval siege engines over modern tanks.
Chancellor: Oh, the horse with the inverted Rook base? That one tends to confuse me, as I rarely look at the base of an icon, but I'll use it if HG concurs.
General: I don't think I'm understanding your coordinates. Following from my current General being (76,1) I'm seeing either a sort of Middle Eastern looking headpiece, or something that looks like Black Panther, depending on whether I have White or All clicked on the view.
Lancer: The difference is that a spear is a small head on the end of a long pole, whereas the lance is a long point with a short handle. That aside, though, did I interpret things right for what you were suggesting? (I'm also considering making it a K4 or K5 that can't capture in adjacent spaces.)
Princess: The elephant is equally bad, for a Princess. And I don't particularly like the horse-with-cross for a BN, either (it's not very clear); I may go back to the original one, in column A there.
Tank: I used the Tank term for simplicity. I could change it to Machine, if you and HG think it'd be better.
OK, I see your suggestion for General now. I think it could work, especially if HG concurs.
Ditto on renaming Tank to Machine.
For the Lancer, I wish I could get something like the one used in Orda Chess, but Board Painter doesn't seem to have that.
That's a reasonable suggestion, Lev, except that I don't think there's any way to add it to the Musketeer Board Painter from where I sit.
Betza notation (extended). The powerful XBetza extension to Betza's funny notation.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]As noted in the text, the lowercase w is still unused. Could that be made to indicate a withdrawing capture? If it has to be coupled with the c, then it could still be usable for other things by itself or with other modifiers.
Or is there already another way to indicate a withdrawing capture?
Vanguard Chess. Game on 16x16 board, with 48 pieces per player. (16x16, Cells: 256) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've updated the Setup illustration to reflect what's been discussed so far, though I'm still not 100% sure about the Lancer and (especially) Princess.
Jean-Louis: OK, I think I understand now. I don't know about there being "plenty" of names, but I find that the icon I'm using is basically an old Roman engine called a helepolis. So that'll have a letter symbol of H, and a move of WDH.
I've updated, as well as I could determine, all the text and graphics for the discussion up to this point. I think I'll have to correct some stuff for the Lancer, and I'm still not sure that everyone will find the Princess acceptable, but otherwise I think it's almost ready to take it for a spin (that is, load the Betza notation into the test applet and see if anything's too weak or two powerful in practice more than theory).
Lev: This. (My eye and hands are really no good at trying to do anything freehand, so I try to use machine systems for things when I can.)
Aurelian: What if I were to change the Lancer's (4,2) move to just one or two Knight moves (K2)?
I'm also considering just giving a Queen's move, but not able to capture one space away (without any Knight-like moves).
With the Lancer, I'm mainly looking to make it more powerful than a Knight, less powerful than a Queen, and not too similar to a Nightrider.
As it happens, when I first tried to include this piece I was only aware of it being used in theoretical problems with a (4,2) jump. I've since learned that it's used in Orda Chess, where it moves (without capturing) like a Knight, but captures like a Rook. I may go to that way of doing it if what I have here seems to clunky (also to provide consistency).
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
I tried this out on the Jocly board. It's quite interesting and fun! I think I'd enjoy playing a physical game.
A small note: The text description of the opening layout is just a little bit unclear (especially with two of the lines on the list broken up), and doesn't quite match the illustration, which in turn doesn't match what's on the Jocly board (the Lion and Eagle aren't shown on the illustration). It should only take a couple of quick edits to fix, though.