Comments by GaryK.Gifford

I looked at a Cannons of Chesstonia game in progress [jejujeju-
rodriguez-2007-101-133] and was surprised to see that no Cannons were visible... This was because the players replaced he cannon images with their loaded projectile.  Though the game can be played that way, it was intended that the Cannons remain visible and that their load be displayed in the white load square (w1 for the White; x8 for Black).  Also, as a reminder, Cannons can move vertically up or down the y file for White [z file for Black] to position a launch. A 3-move sample game in the Rules shows how to load, move, and launch a cannon.  Best regards to all.

Abdul-Rahman Sibahi, Thank you for commenting.  Your idea would certainly work and I did think about it back when the game first appeared.  The way I imagined it was simple, accomplished by linking pawns: K and Q pawns, both B Pawns, both Knight Pawns, both Rook Pawns... each a Doppelganger to their 'linked' associate. Since Pawns change files from time to time, they would need an identifier to show Doppelganger relations. 

I prefer the idea of more player control which exists in the current version.  Note - the Doppelganger Pawns are 'not random' ... the rules state:

'If a pawn is captured, the player making the capture removes it plus any one other enemy pawn (capturer’s choice). If the removal of the second piece (or pawn) causes check to your opponent, that is fine. But you cannot capture a piece (or pawn) if removal of its counter part would put your King in check.'

As to which is the better concept (pre-determined Pawn-doppelganger or Player-selected Pawn Doppelganger), that probably is a matter of opinion, like comparing Chinese Chess and Korean Chess.  On that call, I am in the minority.

Your idea is certainly logical, has merit, and would prove easier for programmers.  I sort of like coming across games that computers do not yet play... but usually it is only a matter of time before they do.  

I seem to recall seeing a set of pieces with different colors at the bases.  Pawns of that design would work with your suggestion.

If you want-I will add the variant to Doppelganger and call it something like 'the Abdul-Rahman Sibahi Doppelganger Variant' and give you credit. You could modify the pawn Doppelganger aspect if desired, based on proximity.  There are several different pawn-link possibilities. Just let me know.  Or, if you'd like to create a separate page with your rules - as your variant of Doppelganger - I have no problem with that.  It would need its own pre-set to keep the ratings aspect fair. 

Thanks again, very much, for the comment.  Best regards, Gary

Charles - Thank you very much for the informative comment.  I am currently learning Espanol, and Aanca does not appear in my Spanish dictionaries, but I do see that it appeared in 1283, in the book 'Libro del Acedrex.' I used the 'Aanca' name because of the Ralph Betza write up about it (referenced in his Tripunch rules).  Of course, in Tripunch Ralph increased the power of Gryphons and Aancas. But I thought they were pretty impressive pieces, left as they were... and I had a strong desire to get them both into a game at some point.

It is nice to know that the Spanish were using them back in the 1200's.  When I stumbled across comments about  Jean-Louis Cazaux graphics, some comments of which were far from flattering, I could not resist looking them up... and, to my surprise, I found a certain charm to them, sort of a modest medieval atmosphere lingering over most of them.... and after I read over the piece movements and looked at many of the Cazaux graphics I had the 'Gryphon Aanca' game forming in my mind, with a few new pieces joining.  At any rate, I am glad you seem to like the game.  I am hoping to have a pre-set for it later this month and am anxious to play it at CV.

P.S. Your name of 'Archdeacon' for the 'Aanca' piece is indeed a good one.

David - thanks for suppling information regarding pieces that change.  Unlike the obvious Pawn promotions in Chess, more limited pawn promotions in Xianqi, or piece promotions in Shogi, my first piece that could transform was the Morph in Pillars of Medusa.  It started out moving as a Bishop, but it could optionally change into a [Morph of] the piece or Pawn it captured (on the turn of capture).

Several years ago I bought a Steve Jackson game called 'Proteus' - It is played on a standard 8x8 chess board.  The pieces are 8 identical cubes per player, with a different piece on each of the 6 surfaces. The pieces can rotate up or down to increase or decrease their value.  I'll not spill out the rules here, but will mention that it is one of my all time favorite variants.

The Courier Game {which I realize now is ''recognized'' - though I had somehow remained blind to it) appears to be the missing link between Shatranj and modern Chess.  This Shatranj Variant was first described in 1202. The rules page states that [the Courier Game was]''played up until the beginning of the 19th century. It was the first popular form of chess to incorporate the piece we now call the 'bishop' though it was then called the 'courier' (hence the name of the game).''

In addition to the rules for this 12 x 8 board game [which includes a ferz, wazir, afil (like the elephant), and man (non-royal King)] as we find in Shatranj, the author has included a printable cutout board and pieces.

This is a great historical page.  Well done.

David - Thank you very much for the additional naming convention information.  

Before I add a few comments I'd like to mention that on June 19, 2003, George Hodges wrote a message that relates, in part, directly to piece naming.  He was writing about pieces in the very large Tai Kyoku Shogi game.  That game includes many pieces that we find in our modern CVs.  And it seems that we our not copying these pieces on purpose, but are re-inventing them.  That we are discovering them on our own, unaware in many cases, that they already exist.  But even then, we find as Hodges wrote:
[Begin quote - George Hodges 6/19/2003]
'' Very many of the names of the pieces are now known to be quite wrong; likewise many of the moves of the pieces are also believed to be totally wrong. Consider, for example, that no fewer than 57 pieces, well known from other connected variants, are given with a quite different move! Three ancient sources are now known (as at November 2002), with numerous differences in names and moves; no two of them agree! '' [End Quote]

I found that the HUNTER, which moves forward like a Rook or backwards as a Bishop, is the same piece as the MULTI-GENERAL (Suisho) in Tenjiku Shogi.

My RETNUH, which moves forward like a Rook, but backward as a Knight, came to me while thinking about the HUNTER - I simply substituted the Bishop element with a Knight element - and so I spelled HUNTER in reverse to keep a name relation.  But, as you correctly point out, my RETNUH equals the Adrian King 1999 FIREHORSE from his Typhoon game.  

You also wrote, ''Jeff 'Cavebear' Stroud calls the Falcon a Y-Rider in his 2001 chess variant ABC Chess.'' and ''Army #2 has the [Rook+Alfil+Ferz] compound. This interesting piece cannot be found anywhere else. Eric Greenwood's variant Archabbott Chess has the[B+D+W] piece.''   

I would not be surprised to see these pieces surface in a large and ancient Shogi variant.  For example: Tai Kyoku Shogi uses a 36 X 36 board and has 11 ranks dedicated to each player's starting position. There are 402 pieces for each player (804 pieces!); and 300 different piece moves. 

You also mention,

''I like Jeff Stroud's piece name 'Y-Rider', used in Army #8. The name 'Falcon' is used in Gary K. Gifford's new variant Gryphon Aanca Chess.''

I used FALCON because that was the name Jean Louis Cazaux had used.  Since then I've also seen the FALCON referred to as a HAWKER.  As to the name Y-Rider. Yes, is fitting to the FALCON in Gryphon Aanca.  Because the FALCON gives as a true Y movement.  But there are other Y-movers (riders) and 'Rider' today, often implies repeat moves... like a Knight-Rider.

It has been said that the Aanca was a Gryphon.  However, I came across it
being defined as an 'Elephant Bird.'  

At the site: http://history.chess.free.fr/acedrex.htm we can read about
'Grant Acedrex' d'Alphonse X de Castille (from the year 1283) which
concerns the Aanca [in part], as it was part of a game being discussed.

It is written there, 'The description given by Alfonso does not
correspond to a Gryphon. This word is obviously of Oriental origin, the
arabic word anka designating a mythical giant bird often found in tales
such Sinbad the Sailor. This bird was similar to the Rok or the Phoenix.
The Aepyornis of Madagascar  could have been the inspiration. This bird is
now extinct but it is very likely that it co-existed with man in historic
times. Arabic merchants could have been aware of this animal and it is
very plausible that this was the basis for the legend.'

It is an interesting chess site.  I highly recommend it.

I have the feeling that this may be an excellent game, but I will have to play it first.  Anyway, I have such a good hunch that it is an exciting and fun variant that I just made a pre-set for it.

http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game%3DDragonfly%26settings%3DDF

Abdul, thanks for the comment. Your idea of combining the Desert Wazir and Desert Ferz to make a Desert King is a good one.  That piece would be very powerful .... too powerful on an 8x8 board.... but it might be good on an a 12x12 board (perhaps even a 10x10).  The Desert King could make some pretty incredible jumps - switching between orthagonal and diagonal jumps on a single turn.  It could wipe out a vast army.

You added that 'Knights could also move like the Chinese Mao, but capturing an enemy piece if it happens to be orthogonally adjacent, and they can capture multiple piece at the same turn.'  Yes, there are many possibilities with this jumping theme.  And I imagine some onboard experiments should be conducted.  I think that for the 8x8 board the 4 current desert jumpers [per side] will be sufficient.  But perhaps we can have some of these knew ideas of yours implemented on a larger board?

The 8x8 preset is now available.  Thanks again and best regards. gkg

A few things here - the first two pertaining to Gryphon Aanca Chess, which I have just updated.  The third item pertains to my reduced level of involvement at CV.  

[I.] I have updated pawn movement after thinking of Jeremy Good's question to me as to why they could not move three spaces, after all, it is a 12 x 12 board.  And so, after much thought, now: (a) A pawn on a player's third rank can move 1, 2, or 3 spaces straight. (b) a pawn on a player's 4th rank can move 1 or 2 spaces straight. Pawn en passant is explained in the rules.
 
[II.] After discussing multiple movements with Sam Trenholme, though in the context of other games, I realized that the nature of the piece density and mobility of this game cried out for such movement.  Thus this rule has been added:
MOVEMENT - On each of the first five moves of the game, a player can
move as follows, providing a pawn or piece does not cross the player's 6th rank:
(a) move a combination of up to five different pawns and/or pieces [5 units total] (b) if he (or she) desires to move a pawn or piece beyond their 6th rank they can... however, they can move that pawn or piece only.

[III.] This comment only relates to CV indirectly.  I have received invites  for several games recently... but I unfortunately will not be taking on any more games... not even Catapults of Troy which I really love to play and which I received an invite for - note that I will honor my commitment to the tournament, should it get going again... but will not be able to spend much time on moves, as I did in 2005.]  The reason for declining invites and avoiding comments is that I have several writing commitments.  (a) I still edit the UON (Unorthodox Openings News electronic magazine; (b) I became 'Problem Master' for Chessville and create and send problems weekly, (c)I am editing a relatively large chess book-- hope to be done in three months) (d)I am writing science fiction short stories and a novel (you can read about this at: www.cosmicsubmarine.wetpaint.com.) That is my website and I have some art work there too, including some wooden Desert Pub Chess pieces (that game appears in the novel).  Anyway, these activities take up a great deal of time and so I've not been too active in CV lately.  Best regards to all, sincerely Gary

Chess: Giraffes, Viziers and Wizards: Variations on the Old Game
By DYLAN LOEB McCLAIN
Five years ago, Bobby Fischer said that “the old chess is dead.” Most players do not agree, but that has not discouraged people from inventing chess variants. (read the rest at the following link-- you might have to cut-and-paste. Best regards to all, Gary

LINK

I could not get in to check games... got this message:


Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_LNUMBER, expecting T_VARIABLE or
'$' in
home/chessva/public_html/play/pbmlogs/
besiege_chess/judgmentality-999999999-2007-236-476.php
on line 30

I must admit I am not clear about this contest.  On one hand I was getting the notion that there was a 45/46 square contest with freedom to design rules and pieces; on the other hand, I see a chess constraints contest which was having dimensional restrictions still being discussed.  

Perhaps there are two different topics going on within the same '2007-2008 Chess Variants Design Contest' heading? 

I made a board in anticipation of a 45/46 squares contest... I've not added pieces or rules because I am very much in the fog as to what is allowed.  Are the 45/46 squares even allowed?  Are there two contests planned?

Joe, you write, in part: '... on an 8x8, could the pieces really change?'
Then go on to say, 'I suspect it's unlikely.'  

But I see no justification for that concept.  We have many CV 8x8 boards
that have changed pieces.  I see it as only 'unlikely' if designers
throw out the possibility.  I don't think they should.  Take care.