Comments by ChessShogi

Okay, so maybe I was a bit harsh on the conquer rule, and in hindsight lost sight of my review process...what can I say, human beings are strange sometimes.

Overall, the page looks good.

Queens without the conquer rule has been played many times on Game Courier and has always come to checkmate or one side has resigned. Queens with the conquer rule will be no different.

You'd be surprised at how much a simple rules change can affect a game. Take Annan Shogi. It adds only one new rule - that if the moving pieces has a friendly piece directly behind it, it moves as that piece instead of itself. This doesn't sound like much, but it changes the game so much that the setup is changed and other rules are relaxed or tweaked to account for it.

While the conquer mechanism is interesting, the perpetual capture problem definitely holds it back a lot in terms of playability. The reason normal Queens works is because the pieces get removed from the game after being captured. Because this is not the case in the conquer version, and the flipped pieces is on the origin square, it is very easy for pieces that move alike to perpetually capture one another, making the conquer mechanism very drawish as it is now.

This mechanism might work with piece rosters with a lot of forward bias (e.g. Shogi), but this idea is untested.

This is rather intriguing.

Just a thought, but it would probably work better to either:

• Have all pieces on the same color
• Have two Kings, one for each color, and only require one of them to be checkmated to win.

This is since only half the army can reach the enemy King in the current version, and would be quite drawish if that half got depleted.

The page works quite well in presentation though.

Also, when you modify a page, if you change the Modification date in its metadata so that it is more recent, you can push it closer to the top of the Unprocessed Submissions list.

This page looks good enough to be approved.

The rules may be slightly unclear in some places, but overall they are clear enough that approval is warranted.

Okay, it works now.

As for the Navigational panel, it's not a huge deal, but it just seemed weird to me that those buttons were missing.

It should be fixed.

But the file may be in a cache. Press [ctrl] + f5 to force js reloading?

I'll give it a while.

I have not played this game personally, but I must say, for a multi-move variant, this game was very well-made.

Also, the new circle symbol in GC for past moves is very nice. However, this functionality doesn't seem to work with hexagonal boards (like Hex Shogi 91's).

I changed them to sort by ModifiedDate instead of CreationDate. However, since the revisions and comments are in separate tables of the database, the ModifiedDate will probably not reflect the last action taken.

It may not be ideal, but it's a right improvement.

Edit: This is probably the best possible ordering with the tools we have now.

I have revised all the rules and they look fine to me. I don't know what else to add. Please let me know if there is anything else. I know, the rules of this game seem to be out of this world, but please give it a chance.

I think the problem here isn't so much that the game is bad. I think it's a brilliant concept that mixes the randomness of something like Banqi with the rules of Chess.

The main problem I have with this submission, more than anything else, is that at least some of the rules are poorly communicated. From what I have seen, this is easily the number one reason new submissions don't get approved.

To (hopefully) make your life easier, I will give you the following advice:

• Make use of the Help menu at the top of the page. It is there for a reason!
• Listen to the Editors. The Editors have a lot of experience with Chess variants, oftentimes much more so than the average author. Its the reason Fergus gives the Editors these powers in the first place - he trusts us to use them as well as our expertise to help other authors get their pages published, and not abuse them in the process. So please, don't discount an Editor's opinion just because you think it is wrong.
• Study published pages made other authors. This will give you a benchmark to work from, so you have a better idea of what your submissions should do, which will be helpful not just for this submission, but for all your future submissions as well.
  • Learning the basics of technical writing helps. That's technical, not creative writing.
• Keep it simple, where possible. If you complicate your description of rules too much, you will eventually hit a tipping point where the act of understanding the rules becomes more trouble than its worth. I'm not really sure what to say to fix this...just stop trying so hard.
  • If the point of the game is to be complicated, such as in Bob's Unnecessarily Complicated Chess or Taikyoku Shogi, you'll have to strike a balancing act where the complexity doesn't cross that threshold.
• Keep your terminology consistent. This allows players to quickly refer to something they need help with. If there is any deviations, these should be hammered out.
• Make use of graphics. There's a reason the best pages on this site make use of graphics all over the place. For piece graphics, you should have at least one distinct image for each distinct piece that appears in the game somewhere on the page.
  • A good idea would be to add an image of a solid white or black circle for the Black Swan on this page, so players have an idea of what it looks like.
• Learn some HTML/CSS/JS. Even a basic understanding of the way HTML works will benefit you greatly here, as it will give you way more control over how your page looks. There are guidelines on what you should do when using HTML, see HTML Dos and Don'ts for more details on this.

@Fergus:

Would it be possible for us to order the pages listing Members-Only and WIP submissions by the date of the last action taken on them (creation, revision, comment, etc.) by the author? By pushing pages with the most recent actions to the top, it would greatly improve quality-of-life for the Editors who focus on reviewing submissions, as it would allow us to more easily see which pages the authors genuinely want reviewed, and which ones are just sitting on the site doing nothing (much of the stuff from 2022 and prior, and especially from 2021 and prior, does this).

My gut feeling is that it shouldn't be too hard, but I am not yet fluent enough in SQL to do this by myself yet.

I think the 64-move rule could be operational now(not tested).

From my testing it took 62 moves to reach a long game draw, so either you are slightly off. or I may have miscounted.

I did find the line of code you will need to update.

In hectochess-chess-model.js it is this block of code:

				// check 50 moves without capture
				if(this.noCaptCount>=100) {
					this.mFinished=true;
					this.mWinner=JocGame.DRAW;					
				}

It should be changed to this:

				// check 64 moves without capture
				if(this.noCaptCount>=128) {
					this.mFinished=true;
					this.mWinner=JocGame.DRAW;					
				}

As for the size of the promotion panel, I can’t change it easily, but as the number of large pieces is not limited, I can't see a situation where a bishop, rook or knight would be chosen, so the question arises of keeping them or not.

I would keep the Rook, Bishop, and Knight, for consistency reasons.

Hectochess has been out too long for me to change this. Several other programs, such as ChessV, and Ai Ai, have implemented this game, and I suspect that all of them allow these promotions.

I have renamed the Queen to Beast, which I think is pretty fitting, since the piece is basically halfway between Queen and Amazon.

The only problem I can find (which probably isn't that big of a problem in the first place, but may still be worth fixing) is that it takes 50 moves w/o moving Pawns or capturing to draw in the implementation, whereas Hectochess increase that threshold to 64 due to the increased board size.

Apart from that, everything works properly.

My my, what have we here? A variant so out of the box and original while also staying mostly true to Chess. A brilliant idea with a lot of potential. Of course, there are kinks, so lets get into those.

Each player has 18 pieces.

Perhaps a list explaining how many of each piece?

• Pieces that move orthogonally (Queens and Rooks) are not allowed to be placed next to the reserved squares in the next few moves. This is to allow for both Kings the chance to come into the game. 
• If too many "reserved squares" are under attack by pieces of the same color, players have to make sure that at least one square per King is "safe"(not under direct attack). 
• When placing Pawns on the board, they also have to block eventual attacks on Kings coming from across the board. 
• Long range pieces (Queens, Rooks, and Bishops) have to be placed on the board in such a way that at least two "reserved squares" are safe for placing the Kings. 
• Short range pieces (Knights and Pawns) will have to balance the board against too much control of the long range pieces. 

Perhaps a better way of doing the setup would be to place the two Kings straight away, and then go from there, keeping each army on its own half of the board.

A problem that I quickly noticed is that after setup it may be possible for White or Black to win in a single move (example, in the last diagram White can play Qxh3#).

The board looks better but there is a weird anomaly in the pattern on the last two ranks from White's perspective, which makes it so that two of the rows appear to be merged into a single row, and that Black's white corner square is on the left.

The other problems are all fixed (including King and Queen setup).

As for castling, it shouldn't be too hard to program...I hope.

P.S. I think your update broke the Werewolf Chess image on the dashboard, just so you know.

Yes, the icon will probably be changed.

Okay, the link is fixed. However, it goes to the games dashboard instead of the implemetation itself. I checked, and I didn't see Hectochess listed (or maybe I missed it); however, I did find the implementation's URL.

I have inspected the Hectochess implementation, and it is quite stellar, but there are a few mistakes to fix, which should be pretty easy:

• Black's kingside Knight and Champion have been switched (Champion should be next to the Rook, and Knight should be next to the Bishop)
• White's promotion zone is two ranks too far forward. It should be at the farthest rank.
• A King should be able to castle two or three squares to either side. Currently, the implementation only allows the latter.
• Your board has the white corner square on the left (it should be on the right). Because of this, you ended up swapping the King and Queen (from White's perspective, Queen should be on left side, and King on right side).

Also, some things worth mentioning:

• Hectochess uses a 64-move rule instead of a 50-move rule, due to the increased board size.
• Since there are so many Pawn promotions, it may be beneficial to split the options into two rows or have scrolling on the promotion dialog.

I think this game needs a different name for the piece. It already has a King.

This looks good.

For the Lion we probably could make it work with HGM (it needs to combine drop model + fairy move) but we might finish what we've started first.

Yeah, I would finish what you started first. No need to overwhelm ourselves.

I don't think I will be able to figure out a lot of key aspects for Jocly b/c it is such a complicated interface to program, so I think I it is more prudent to work on other things and let you two handle the Jocly implementations.

@Jean-Louis Cazaux,

I'm sure the Queen+Alibaba compound piece has been invented before. It's a simple enough piece that this is pretty much inevitable.

However, since this game is not part of your Cazaux family of games, the piece will not share the same name as your piece. However, I might rename the Queen in this game, since it is different enough from the Chess Queen that such a change would be beneficial.

As for your version of the piece, I think piece names work best when they are paired with a matching or appropriate symbol. The Medusa name would be ideal if you want to continue using the symbol you are using now.

This looks good.

I think the double King step when not in check would have been an interesting idea though. But to be fair, its hard to do King promotions or enhancements well since the King is the target piece, and needs to be able to be checkmated for decisiveness in more traditional Chess games.

Now for Black Swan...

Man, I am absolutely loving the new Navigational panel on the Game Courier interface.

Only problem I can see is that it doesn't take into account the PHP flip variable in set files, which results in the second player seeing the pieces flipped in sets where image orientation matters, such as Shogi sets.

So close... However, a few things are worth mentioning. (Also, take notes for your other submission, Black Swan)

I. Kings and Dictators

Modest note:

"Crossing back into own territory will not make a King lose its "dictatorial powers"."

"Once a King becomes a Dictator it will remain a Dictator till the end of the game."

These sentences can be merged into one because they carry one sense.

Though so many paragraphs is not normal in my honest opinion, a blocks for each rule can be very useful for better finding the corresponding rule in the text, which is much more useful than correct visual looking.

Lev makes some good points here.

In particular, you could (and probably should) omit two sentences about Kings and Dictators and simply say that a King immediately promotes to Dictator when it crosses into enemy territory.

However, in doing so, you would need to make a separate image for the Dictator and ideally show it in the Pieces section, since it does not appear in the initial setup. Fortunately, the Musketeer Chess Board Painter (which you probably used when making the board image) lets you save the images in its image list. Simply save an appropriate-looking image and upload it to the page's directory, and you should be good.

It may also be helpful to mention that the second Dictator step cannot jump (per I understanding), to avoid confusion from Chu Shogi players, who may think the Dictator is equal to a royal Lion.

II. Paragraph Structure

This issue is way more prominent in Black Swan. It is okay to run sentences together sometimes. The point of a paragraph visually is to divide the text up so it doesn't look like one giant mass of text, making the text easier to read.

In this submission, this isn't a problem.

Redundant Sentences (My own observations)

One of the guidelines for approval is "Write clearly and briefly, so that you are quickly understood." Part of this is avoiding redundant sentences, especially if you could say the same thing by tweaking another sentence.

1. The same is true for the corresponding enemy Pawns.

2. The four Pawns on the third rank can still get a double move if they land on the fourth rank, the starting position of the 12 Pawns. 

The first sentence (1) is redundant, because it is generally understood that the rule applies to each player. To fix this you can replace the second sentence (2) in the Rules section the following:

"Pawns can still make a double move if they land on the starting square of another friendly Pawn."

This is simpler and doesn't depend on the rank number.

The King can also be called Emperor, without changing anything about the rules.

This sentence is unneccessary, and in fact counterproductive. In general, it is best to give pieces one distinct name and only refer to them by that name. However, in keeping with Roman terminology, you could call the King a Consul. (I am a bit of a history nerd, and recently watched Oversimplified's Punic Wars videos. Once this game is approved, I think I might favorite it.)

This looks good as an extension of Chukaga (short for Chu Kagamigi like Chusei is for Chu Seireigi).

You are already listed as the author of this page.

An excellent experimental variant. Need I say any more about a concept so simple and brilliant that it works with any practically any board with an even number of ranks, and with odd numbers of ranks with some adjustment?

If it helps any, try looking at Fergus Duniho's On Designing Good Chess Variants page.

Ok, this looks better. But I do have a few more things to ask here.

If a King gets "dictatorial powers" it will only be allowed to keep the enemy King at two squares distance.

This seems a bit redundant, unless you are trying to say that the King cannot use this power to deliver check. In that case, simply say that the dictatorial powers cannot deliver check.

Also, does the King lose these powers if if moves to its own half of the board?

If a Pawn reaches a promotion line and does not promote straigt away, it will have to advance to the next promotion line in order to be eligible again for promotion. 

If a Pawn reaches the last rank, is it required to promote? This would make a lot of sense, as it keeps you from accidentally leaving a Pawn as a "dead piece".

P.S. It seems that there are a couple of grammar issues here and there in your submissions. These shouldn't matter too much, as long as people can understand what you are saying.

I did already say that none of the seconded games qualify.

Does anyone want to second anything before the month is over? Of the games that have been nominated and seconded, each has problems.

@Fergus,

Perhaps some improvements, even minor ones, to the criteria could be made and/or are in order, if for no other reason than the fact that you said we were running out of eligible variants to be featured when you featured Hectochess.

One improvement we could easily make (which I vehemently recommend) is, for the computer program, replacing the preference for Zillions of Games with a preference for a free-to-play program.

SInce Zillions is a pay-to-play program (meaning it costs money), and you already have it and are accustomed to it, it is safe to say that the Zillions of Games requirement is a personal preference on your part. Unless you are a connoisseur in the types of games that Zillions is made for, you won't be likely to pick it up, especially with the price tag. It makes no sense to have a preference for a pay-to-play program for making to-be-featured Chess Variants when there are plenty of free-to-play options for doing the exact same thing, especially with the world in its current state.

If you want something with rule enforcement options, there are several options, such as ChessV, Ai Ai, Jocly, or Ludii. I would highly recommend listing H. G. Muller's Interactive Diagrams as well, as it is extremely flexible, and has become at least somewhat well-known and adopted by the site's contributors (for me this was a godsend). Each has its own advantages and drawbacks, but these would likely better serve as examples while having the preference as "a free-to-play program" in general.

@Florin Lupusoru,

Please read this Comment all the way through, and wait until the end before judging.

Maybe it's just me, but I am struggling to see much of a difference between the last version and this one. While I do see a few improvements, the page largely looks unchanged.

The concept itself looks very promising, but the way the actual rules are worded makes them very unclear to me. Ideally, a Game page should be made so that the rules are easy to learn.

I think it would be highly beneficial for you to look at and study some of the published articles on this site to get a better idea of the standards that we have for our pages. The pages I have authored are a good place to start (e.g. Hectochess or Yangsi), as I have a good idea of what an approvable submission should look like in general, at least as far as Game pages and Preset pages are concerned. Your pages don't necessarily have to meet my level of quality to be approved. Your submission SPQR is already close to eligible, albeit still with a few kinks to work out in its current form, which I will eventually touch on in that thread. However, they need to do their job effectively and have at least some quality to them. This is something that all Editors on this site will generally agree on, so having a benchmark to follow will help.

P.S. I probably need to refine my review process as I just got Editor status last month. However, my points still stand.

I believe the exclamation point does make for a distinct ID: DS vs !DS.

Distinct enough, I guess.

The Deva and Dark Spirit look much better now that they have their Maka Dai Dai moves.

I'll take another good look at this one tomorrow. It's getting pretty late for me right now, as of the writing of this Comment.

@Fergus,

I think there should be a dedicated page for WIP pages (reviewwip.php or something similar), like the Review New Submissions page for Members-Only submissions, if there is not one already. Since it is now possible for a page to be either WIP (Authors-and-Editors-only) or Members-Only, this would make access to WIP pages easier. We can then have a link to the WIP page list on The Editor Page, or perhaps even on the homepage as well.

I meant an Interactive Diagram in the Setup section.

I guess now that I think about it, this is good enough for approval, considering that it is an army for CWDA rather than a standalone game.

This and the original are interesting games (more so the original). However, I think a move that moves or jumps to the second square and then slides from that square in the same direction (jR/jB/jQ) would be much a more effective choice for the sliding moves. As it stands now, no single piece is capable of delivering checkmate with the help of its own King.

Already this is a much better submission than Black Swan (whose rules still do not answer a lot of the questions that I posted, and ended up giving me headaches, hence my lack of a reply thus far).

There is a typo, and a couple points that need clarifying.

All chess rulles apply, except for the promotion rules. 

Here "rulles" is misspelled.

If a King crosses into enemy territory it will get "dictatorial powers", meaning that the King will be allowed to move and capture twice in a row, provided it is not in check. 

This can be put before the line explaining the border between friendly and enemy territory. I think it flows better that way.

There's also a few points that need clarifying here:

• Is the second step optional? (I assume it is from the current wording)
• Can the two steps be made as a jump?
• Can the second step return to its starting square, even when this would skip a turn?
  • If it can skip a turn, are there any additional rules about turn skipping that we should be aware of?

Also, since there are Pawns starting one row back from the full row of Pawns, I must ask about the initial double step:

• If one of these Pawns lands on the starting square of another Pawn, can it still make a double step?

Hmmm...I guess you technically managed to make the page good enough to be approved without images. There's something you don't see every day. I am really on the fence here...

I guess I'll approve it and see what happens.

Oh...wait. Are there any restrictions on the directions you can jump Pawns in (apart from the Knight, whose directional restrictions are well-defined).

Kirin (K) and Phoenix (P) have same IDs as King and Pawn, respectively, and the Dark Spirit adn Divine Sparrow have duplicate IDs (albeit with the latter having an exclamation-point prefix). For the former two, I think you meant KR and PH as in normal Kagamigi.

Also, the decision to have the Deva and Dark Spirit promote to something with the exact same move as its unpromoted counterpart is baffling to me. I know it very occasionally happens with Taikyoku Shogi, but there isn't really a reason to do this.

They're pretty close. However, if you want to stay true to the images I made, I should point out two things.

Firstly, you have three lines, indicating limited-range-5. Only the two outer-most of these lines are used for limited-range-4 in my reference piece for limited range.

Whenever a bulge transitions to a non-adjacent step, the border goes from straight to the rounded "hole" that indicates no move in  that direction. Take these images, for example:

Also, the piece list generated by the Interactive Diagram does not show the promotions. You have to enter those manually, like so (pieceType is the position of the piece in the list, starting at 1):

<ul>
<li onclick="ShowMoves(pieceType)">Insert HTML Here</li>
...
</ul>

Thank you for making the page.

Here's the reference pieces for the Mnemonic images.

https://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSchuseireigi/large-mnemonic-reference-pieces.zip

The Intro, Setup and most of the Pieces sections are fine. Overall, the concept looks promising. However, the Rules section still leaves out many crucial details, such as the following:

• Does the Black Swan Event refer specifically to a group of pieces resulting from turning into Black Swans or Pawn promotions?
  • If not, you can call any group of one, two, or three non-King pieces a Black Swan Event.
• Does "it cannot be placed on the board on the Black Swans' starting position, in order to avoid capturing" mean that Black Swans can only be placed on the third or fourth ranks?
  • This should be in the Rules section.
• Can Black Swans make a double step on their first move?
  • If so, if a Black Swan from the first rank turns into a Black Swan after moving to the second rank, does the new Black Swan:
    • have the ability to make a double step?
      • If not, then a problem arises from having to keep track of which Black Swans started where.
    • have immunity from capture?
  • Same questions apply to Black Swans being dropped on the board due to Black Swan Events, if they can be dropped on the first or second ranks.
• How am I supposed to determine the number of pieces that results from a Black Swan Event, such as:
  • a Black Swan turning into another Black Swan?
    • do the probabilities from Pawn promotions apply here as well?
  • promoting a Pawn?
• Are pieces that are dropped on the board always Black Swans, or can the player choose which piece appears?
• Does "nearby empty squares" mean anything in particular? If not, this phrase should be omitted or replaced with "square(s) on own half of board".
• What happens if all pieces are on the board, or all available drop spaces for extra pieces are filled up?

The Wildebeest Pawns are definitely far better than the originals. Aside from not having the problem of having to track which Pawns start where, they fit the theme of the game much better.

I still think an orthogonal equivalent of the Elephant would be a good addition, but that is up to you.

The only other improvement I can think of at the moment is to have piece images next to their descriptions in the Pieces section. Regardless, this page looks good enough to be approved.

Usually, in Shogi games, people just use +<unpromoted form> for the promoted form of a piece, but this works, as long as there is a clear link between the promoted and unpromoted forms of a piece.

Earlier, the week ending 13 Jan., I had seen someone's submissions approved where the statement was not added, and I'd thought it was not really required anymore on CVP site, if it ever was.

I guess the statement isn't truly necessary. since the majority of this site's members know how to play Chess, but it helps if you want to avoid ambiguity, especially for people who have never seen Chess or one of its variants before.

I have approved the four variants mentioned in my previous comment.

It is definitely an improvement. However, I think this page would really benefit from some images showing what you mean. If you want an easy way to generate such images, the Musketeer Chess Board Painter is an excellent option.

Also, as it is now, the last variant appears to be the same as the base game.

This is updated with some of my latest icon additions, so unless I've missed something, all that's left is to figure out how to make promoted pieces demote upon being captured (if that's even necessary). Then I can move the Diagram into the main article, and it'll be ready to go.

Setting holdingsType=-1 in the Diagram definition takes care of these types of demotions automatically.

Also, you say promotion is mandatory upon reaching the last row. Does this promotion rule apply to all pieces or only to Pawns? If the former, does it also apply upon leaving the last row after a drop?

Usually, the Pieces section is where the pieces are listed, but I suppose the Rules section works too.

Hidden Items have started showing up on the What's New page, which shouldn't be happening. I assume these still need to be converted to the new format in the database.

This is actually supposed to be playable with a basic set, so the Kirin addition wouldn't work.

Just flip one of the Rooks to represent the Dragon King or Dragon Horse. Ultima does the same thing.

The BNN/BN0 move comes from one of my older games, Ryugi.

I'm not sure why some of the sentences are broken up into fragments. This is unneccessary.

It is unclear what the rules for the number of pieces are, both when a Black Swan turns into another Black Swan and in terms of Pawn promotion (What types are brought out, rules for deciding number of pieces, etc.). Also, does the term "nearby empty square(s)" mean anything? If not, it can be omitted and/or replaced with "square(s) on own half of board" each time it appears.

If a Black Swan moves and turns into another Black Swan and ends up on a starting square of another Black Swan, is it still unable to be captured?

The Pawns and Soldiers in the Diagram promote to King. Did you mean to have them promote to Begum instead?

Otherwise, this page looks good enough to be approved.

It is not super clear which pieces promote to what in this pages current form. I'd recommend making the promoted pieces have a + in front of their unpromoted form's name, as in Shogi, as follows:

• NightRider -> +H
• Rook -> +L
• Dragon Horse -> +U
• Flying Stag - > +G

Otherwise, this page looks good enough to be approved.

I have tried the game online, and it is really fun, especially on the normal version.

I don't think you need the word retainer in the sentence "Try to complete the King’s tour with the fewest retainer casualties as possible!".

Also, you should clarify that Pawns move upward, not downward, and that they can swap directly forward as well as diagonally forward.

Otherwise, this looks good enough to be approved.

I'm not sure how a change to the Pawn move will make the game less drawish. Regardless, the page is good enough to be approved.

I assume the orthodox pieces move as in standard Chess? If so, it would be beneficial to say that in the Pieces section. Same with SOHO Chess, Champagne Chess and Parity Chess.

I assume the orthodox pieces move as in standard Chess? If so, it would be beneficial to say that in the Pieces section. Same with Champagne Chess and Parity Chess.

I assume the orthodox pieces move as in standard Chess? If so, it would be beneficial to say that in the Pieces section.

I assume the orthodox pieces move as in standard Chess? If so, it would be beneficial to say that in the Pieces section.

That explains a lot...

I think this is a good start, but I think there are ways to make it better.

• Having one Dragon King and Dragon Horse instead of two
• Adding a pair of Kirins in place of the second Dragon King and Dragon Horse
• Giving the Dragon a different, but still powerful, move, such as Bishop+Nightrider (BN0) (The current one can easily force mate by itself, which is usually too powerful for a chess game)

Otherwise, I think this page is good enough to be approved.

I have a question about the limit on the number of Tsarevna. How will you know when the limit is reached? It seems to me that there is no clear way to tell, based on what information would be available as you play the game over-the-board. Also, is this limit to three Frog promotions per game applied to each player separately, or is it shared between both players?

Also, do all the rules of standard Chess apply except where contradicted?

Otherwise, the page looks good, save for a few errors in your English (probably owing to you speaking Russion).

This page would benefit from some piece images and setup/move diagrams. Otherwise, it looks pretty decent.

François Houdebert has some Shogi piece maps for his Jocly implementations that actually work better than the ones currently in use on this site (except for Tori Shogi apparently). Perhaps we can use those for their respective games?

I tested this description of the bug, and that looks to be exactly right. Would switching lines 142 and 143 help?

Also, does updating this require updating both the browser cache and CloudFare's cache in order for changes to show?

Edit: I also tested this with the other drop games. The bug also appears in Tori Shogi (Three Swallows instead of Two Pawns) but not in Mini Shogi.

Simple and effective.

This page looks good.

I feel that the diagram showing which pieces are paired doesn't do the best job at it, and would be better replaced by a table that pairs the pieces together, or something similar. Or you may not need it at all, since the Piece diagrams already do this.

Regardless, I feel that this page is good enough to be approved.

This page would benefit from having a setup diagram and piece images mapped to their descriptions.

Now that I have actually bothered to look at this page due to my newfound job as Editor, I must say, this concept is hilarious.

The page is well-done and I relish the novelty (get it?).

P.S. Unfortunately, it doesn't want to show up on the What's New Page for some reason...

The Interactive Diagram completely lacks piece images, and so just looks like an empty board to me. Please fix this.

Other than that, this page looks pretty good. Simple, but effective.

This is almost good enough to be approved.

I would recommend having an image showing the Pawn move, which would help explain the difference compared to standard Chess.

Also, if the left horizontal double step is allowed, then it may be wise to adopt the rule from Glinski's hexagonal chess, which allows Pawns that end up on the starting square of another Pawn to make a double step from that square, so you don't have to keep track of which Pawn started where.

Speaking of rules, I took a look at your rules for Seireigi, and noticed that the image for the Great Elephant's move diagram is not lined up with with the piece's actual move. The current image shows a (disconnected) dot two spaces ahead of the piece, and no backwards diagonal step. There should be a dot on all spaces adjacent spaces except the one directly behind the piece, along with the two ranging moves.

The Jocly implementation has the correct move.

This looks good, aside from the lack of a Diagram in the Setup section. However, I must ask about this line in the promotion rule.

Promotion is mandatory upon reaching the furtherst row.

Does this apply to all pieces, or just the Pawns? If the former, it seems a bit random to me. Also, does this apply if the move starts on the back row?

This is certainly an intriguing idea.

I think this page would benefit greatly from an Interactive Diagram.

Also, are there any other differences in the rules of the game? If so, you should put those in the Rules section. Otherwise, I'd say in the Rules section that the rules are the same as in Chess except where contradicted.

This is certainly a novel idea. However, I must ask you to clarify what you mean by "jumping over a friendly Pawn in its starting position."

Does this mean jumping over the Pawn like a Checker would an enemy Cherker (land on square immediately on the other side of a checker)? Or does this mean something else? How does this change if the condition that the Pawn must be on its starting square is removed?

In the second house rule about the special move for the Knight, is this bound to the same restrictions as the special moves for the other pieces? If so, then the Knight would never be able to jump horizontally, as it starts behind all the Pawns.

Also, if a Pawn jumps over another friendly piece on its first move, how does that affect en passant captures?

This looks good.

My only suggestion would be to maybe break up the rules into something resembling a list to make it easier to read.

This looks good so far, but please ensure that all pieces in the Interactive Diagram are showing.

The Jocly implementation has two mistakes in it. Please fix these.

1. Player B's Heavenly Horse (promoted Knight) has its jumping moves reversed (the stepping moves are fine).
2. Pieces that get dropped into the promotion zone are able to promote, which shouldn't be possible.

As for the Kanji, the current implementation works fine, but may be a problem if you want to implement the larger Seireigi variants in Jocly as well.

Otherwise, stellar implementation.