Comments by CharlesGilman

'Pawn promotion can only happen on back hexagons previously occupied by opposing forces.'
So, if they get to the end of file a or l (in the 2 player game) they have to wait until there's an enemy to capture to get them somewhere where they can be promoted? This is a major departure from square-cell and even other hex variants. For myself I consider McCooey's game a greater improvement on Glinsky's, and suspect that others will agree.

A possible solution has occurred to me to the complications of certain Xiang Qi pieces being restricted or having no FIDE Chess counterpart:
	The Elephant is barred from entering enemy territory, but its positional counterpart the Bishop is not, leaving it turning into an Elephant that shouldn't be there. On the other hand the Cannon can enter enemy territory but, in your variant, has no counterpart to become when it gets there. How about making the Bishop transform to a Cannon and vice versa? That way both pieces can continue in a relatively normal way. This also echoes the Bishop's position in Shogi, which could be considered equivalent to one of the Cannons.
	The King and Queen can enter enemy territory, but the reason why the General and Ferz cannot is that the Fortress bars them getting anywhere near it. This could be seen as the Fortress being the real barrier for them, in which case the King and Queen should transform to a General and Ferz unable to enter the Fortress. As they therefore cannot give check they are sufficiently weak pieces to not upset the balance.
	I hope that these ideas go some way to propelling this variant toward excellence.

'The Feeble Knight, on b1, g1, b8, and g8, is initially able to leap in the forwardmost Knightly direction towards the center line (from b1 to c3), and turns 45 degrees.'

Approximately 37 or 53 degrees, actually. The directions of the Knight are at 45 degrees to those of the Camel, not to each other. Likewise its compounds.

It has just occurred to me that strengthened-FIDE-array variants, such as this one and my own recent Overkill Chess and Quadripunch Chess, are particularly suited to combining with my Nearlydouble concept, so that the stronger pieces have a larger board to make better use of their greater powers. Would you be happy for me to include a properly-attributed Nearlydouble Tripunch Chess among a page of such variants?

Some other orthogonal/diagonal pairs of animals that might be added are
Panda and Bear (former distinguished by patch of opposite colour around
eye) and Sow and Boar (latter distinguished by tusks). Along with the
suggested Wildebeest character it might be worth including a slimmed-down
version for for Antelope or Gazelle depending on context. If some kind of
'striping' is to be applied to the Knight character for the Zebra, it
could also be applied to the Camel for the 5:1 Zemel, and to the Elephant
for the piece distinctive to Korean Chess.

The labels for the directions are somewhat confusing as 'oblique' usually indicates a direction such as that of the FIDE Knight, going through intervening cells off-centredly. A more accurate description for the directions of each colour are forward/backward hex-diagonal, sideways orthogonal, forward/backward orthogonal, and sideways hex-diagonal. The linepieces in these directions I term Unicoranker, Rookfiler, Rookranker, and Unicofiler. These definitions also work on a Glinsky board, but on that it is the first two that have four directions and the second two only two.

Hugo is wrong. It is true that any piece moving to threaten an Orphan is automatically threatened by it, but what if the piece is also protected by an ally? Then if the Orphan captures it the Orphan itself can be captured as it has no time to capture the next piece. For example, there is a Black Orphan on a4 and a White Rook moves to d4, where a Bishop on b2 protects it. If the Orphan captures the Rook, the Bishop can capture the Orphan.
	Is this a record for the time taken to reply to a comment? My excuse is that I have only recently become interested in pieces which imitate.

Some other images that could be worth including are:
Aanca/Anchorite - perhaps punningly represented by an anchor
Crooked Bishop
Crooked Rook
Fox
Gryphon
Kangaroo
Squirrel
Tank
Wolf

Notes:
¹same as Base in Prince, but name changed to avoid confusion with suffix -base meaning Man and Beast 12 downward-orientated piece.
²differs from Scientist in Prince in lacking 3d-specific Technician move.
³differs from University in Prince in lacking 3d-specific Technician move

'Really diagonal is just orthogonal on a different, bigger board'
	This is something that I have illustrated with my Nested series of variants. For the implication in 3d, see my comments on Tetrahedral Chess.

'Knights are diagonal but use 2 different diagonals together that make them not colorbound'
	Not technically diagonal but I see what you mean. The moves of the Veering Knight and Backing Knight are again the orthogonals of a smaller board:
	.*....*.. ..*....*.
	...*....* *....*...
	*....*... ...*....*
	..*....*. .*....*..
	....@.... ....@....
	.*....*.. ..*....*.
	...*....* *....*...
	*....*... ...*....*
	..*....*. .*....*..

'hunters (pieces that move and capture in diferent ways)'
	It is snipers that have different noncapturing and capturing moves; hunters have different forward and backward moves (and no same-rank ones).

'The precedent for the Ajax-Pieces not being able to capture with their adopted Commoner moves is the Pawn.'
	Not really, the Pawn uses one type of direction in which it can move without capturing, and one type in which it can capture, but none in which it can do both. Likewise the Yeoman, Steward, and other offshoots.
	All the traditional 'crownings' of linepieces (Shogi, Duke of Rutland, Wellisch hex &c) include the ability to capture with the extra move. Indeed you use images whose usual meaning is a piece that can capture in all its directions. Your new images could prove more popular for straightforward Rook+Knight+Ferz and Bishop+Knight+Wazir. As it happens I have been writing a page whose introduction mentions Rook+Knight+Ferz, although as far as I know it has yet to make it into any actual games.

I am hesitant to criticise a variant by one of the Polgar family, but a talent for playing on square-cell boards does not necessarily imply one for designing games for hex ones. This does look very muvch like a game by someone who has not made a great study of hex variants, as it addresses several issues of the hex board less well than variants on these pages do.

A severely bound Rookranker is really a very poor analogue to the Rook. A better piece to complement the Rookfiler here (or the Rookranker in the Wellisch orientation) would be the Moorhen - a hex piece moving straight forward/backward/left/right regardless of which two are orthogonal and which hex-diagonal. This is bound to alternate files here and alternate ranks on Wellisch boards. However it would then be logical for the Queen analogue to also include the straight sideways directions. As regards subdividing of just Rook directions, my own approach to this in Altorth Hex Chess avoided severe bindings and was also Migrant-based.

It is also odd that Migrants line up with their own edge of the board rather than - as in Glinsky's game - the far edge to which they are aiming. It would make more sense on a star-shaped board to arrange a row of Pawn analogues with the middle one furthest back rather than further forward, as in my own Flatstar. At first I thought that a 37-cell might be too small for that, but it could be done with six spaces behind to fill, in two blocks of three - rather than a single back row of five. Ther weakest piece would be doubled in number - the Rookfiler in the case of Mr. Polgar's own choice of pieces. The array prior to placing the back pieces would be (excuse the crude colouring):

Now that I think about it I haven't devised names for pieces moving at least two staps along one kind of radial and at most two along another, but I can see that they are interesting pieces. Pieces that could be seen as Mansion+Ferz and Dean+Wazir are intermediate between the Mansion and Dean and corresponnding enhancements of full linepieces such as the Infanta and Inquisitor - whicvh could be seen as Mansion+Wazir and Dean+Ferz. If this inspires any ideas for names I would be interested to hear them.

Well most of my Quadruple Besiege variants have at least twice as many pieces with a Rook move, so that will help Checkmate to happen. Remember that the minimum to Checkmate on a board with edges is a Rook plus one's own King, so an extra Rook to effect a virtual edge should allow the same on this board.
	The geometry is not quite Moebius, it's a bit more complex than that. A single orthogonal step across a horizontal join appears as a 10:9 leap. Bishops really are colourbound and, as I say in the text, each visible 10-cell diagonal loops round dircetly on itself.

The point is that the Huntsman and Hawksman are defined on a corner orientation. In this context the forward diagonal is toward the opponent's corner and the backward one toward one's own corner. The directions at right angles to these I term sideways diagonals. There are also two forward and two backward orthogonals in this orientation. Thus to sum up the differences between linepieces with 5-6 directions they divide into:
	Goldrider (face-to-face) - 4 orthogonal and 2 diagonal;
	Goldrider (corner) - 4 orthogonal and 1 diagonal;
	Silverider (face-to-face) - 4 diagonal and 1 orthogonal;
	Silverider (corner) - 4 diagonal and 2 orthogonal;
	Huntress and Hawkress (face-to-face) - 3 orthogonal and 2 diagonal;
	Huntsman and Hawksman (corner) - 3 diagonal and 2 orthogonal.
Would diagrams help? If so I will endeavour to add them when I have more time.

None of this page's long-range pieces are switching. The Rhino's first three destinations are those of the Wazir, Knight, and Camel. Knight plus Camel equals famously triangulating Gnu. Likewise the even destinations (exactly as with the Mirror Rhino) are destination of the Nightrider - a straight linepiece like the Bishop and Rook and so able to make two moves in the same direction and return in a single move the same length as the two together.
	Indeed not even a Waverer, a Rhino restricted to moves of odd numbers of steps, is switching as a Camel move can be reversed in four Wazir ones. Nor is a Feverer, a Mirror Rhino so restricted, as a Ferz move can be reversed in two Zebra ones. It may be more difficult when what I am for short calling Camel/Zebra moves are stepping ones here, but it is posible.

I would grateful if some editor could make the correction - and correct 'aranged' to 'arranged' while we're at it.

As I understand it there were royal and non-royal caliphs, just as there
are royal and non-royal governors. Caliph has the advantages that it can be
extrapolated, giving along with Bishop+Knight=Cardinal names for all Bishop
compounds with all coprime oblique leapers. Thus Zebra gives Zerdinal,
Giraffe Girdinal, Antelope Nardinal, Zemel Zeliph, Satyr Sardinal, Gimel
Giliph, Rector Rerdinal... If anyone can think of a better alternative that
can be extrapolated as obviously I'm eager to know it. Likewise for the
Rook compounds Canvasser gives Rook+Zemel=Zenvasser,
rook+Gimel=Ginvasser...

You say that you have changed the Pawns anyway, compared to the elusive original. So each player has two lots that cross each other. Are each lot barred from capturing outside the line of four orthogonals along which they make their noncapturing moves, as the ones in my Fivequarters are? If not, what happens if they turn onto off it? Does it make a difference whether they do so in the enemy loop or their own?

The link is broken. The information is now at the folloeing address:

http://www.colebank.com/ichess/index.asp

Regarding Fivequarters, Red and Green Pawns can move only within the long orthogonals a-d. Thus they can capture from b to a or c, and from c to b or d, but from a only to b and from d only to c. Likewise Yellow and Blue Pawns as regards long orthogonals e to h.

So what happens when Lemniscate Pawns go 'off-track'? From what you've said, if the Pawn starting on f1 captures from l4 to t2 it gets fast-tracked to promotion to Steward, but what if the one starting on b4 captures from l1 to g3? It ends back on its own player's part of the board! Does it flip over and start behaving as if it had started on f3?

You could be right, I was just lumping them together as 'not covered anywhere else'. One further connection is that Ferry moves along the River, but it could be regarded as a multi-cell non-capturer moving along a pair of ranks. They seem to me to fall into three groups.
	The Ferry, Halter, and Trampoline can all move, either under their own steam or with the aid of another piece, but cannot capture and have a different effect on pieces. They can therefore be considered special cases of non-capturing pieces.
	The Raft and Tardis are board sections that move - and again do not capture. They take their pieces with them.
	The Bridge, Fortress, and River do not change their location on the board but still affect how pieces move.

George Duke writes: 'Now respecting hexagons, I like squares and cubes exclusively -- and tetrahedral 3-d spaces. No triangles, no hexagons.'
	Well Tetrahedral Chess has neither no triangles nor no hexagons. Look at any of the faces. They are all triangles. Now look how the Rook moves along those faces - in any of six directions at 60° to each other. Yes, the faces are hex boards, as clearly as those of cubic variants are square-cell ones.
	Now look at a cubic board. Let's say the corthogopnals are 1-8, a-h, and s-z. Look how Bishops move within the plane comprising sa1, sb2, sv3, sd4, se5, sf6, sg7, sh8, ta2, tb3, tc4, td5, te6, tg7, th8, ua3, ub4, uc5, ud6, ue7, uf8, va4, vb5, vc6, vd7, ve8, wa5, wb6, wc7, wd8, xa6, xb7, xc8, ya7, yb8, za8. Yes, it's exactly how a Rook moves on a triangle of hex cells!

Another interesting variation on the Mao/Moa family would be a piece
requiring an empty Mao pass-through and an occupied Moa one, a piece
requiring the opposite, and a compound of the two. Any thoughts of names
for that lot? Note that the last is different from the Hopping Moo, which
requires an occupied pass-through but need not have an empty one.

So are the comments on Bachelor Kamil and the Buffalo satisfactory or would
you prefer a full submission, and if so to what address? Can you find the
updated file for Honeycomb Chess or should I send that again, and if so
again to what address?

Ome-step divergent pieces are in MAB 02. Fusilier is, I believe, an alternative name for the Steward, the piece that moves without capturing as a Wazir and captures as a Ferz. The piece that moves with or without capturing as a Wazir and captures as a Ferz is the Xaja Wazir. The Ajax Ferz moves without capturing as a Wazir and with or without capturing as a Ferz. The piece that moves without capturing as a Ferz and captures as a Wazir I term the Contrasteward, but I once saw it termed the Guardian somewhere since, probably only a problematist usage so far. It would be interesting to know if anyone thinks it worth substituting Guardian for Contrasteward and devising similar replacements for Contrawaiter and Contrabutler.

Out of curiosity, does anyone think that I'm flogging a dead horse by terming the MAB 12 Sextoranker+Ninjafiler compound Mule? This is something of a dead-end name for a Stockable piece (i.e. one like the Brook, Fwezir, et cetera), as I am noticing as I introduce ever more such pieces. Were it called the Nsexton as copying the logic for radial pieces would dictate I could then extrapolate to Elfranker+Underfiler=Uelf, Fenceranker+Lectufiler=Lfencer, Brook+Nsexton=Nsenvasser, Unicorn+Nsexton=Nsefila, Brook+Uelf=Nleaseholder, Unicorn+Uelf=Nleprechaun, et cetera. The Stock forms of these, which MAB 15 would cover, are Stock analogues to the Camel, Zebra, Marshal, Cardinal, Canvasser, and Caliph. I could also name analogues for the Gnu/Gazelle/Bison if to Sexton+Elf=Morgai and Ninja+Lecturer=Coallure I added names for Ninja+Underscore, Sexton+Fencer, Elf+Fencer, and Underscore+Lecturer.