[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by JaredMcComb
I don't get it. Could someone help explain this to me? A diagram or two would be helpful as well.
Whoops, I didn't think that I shouldn't nominate it because I made the page. I thought that I could do so because I didn't invent the game. As for its popularity, it was made into a Super Famicom (Japanese SNES) game (not many CVs are besides Chess and Shogi), although the rest of your argument sort of makes this a moot point.
No offense, but I'd prefer that the ZRF for this game reflect the rules correctly. Not being very adept at programming myself, would you mind doing this 'hacking' and updating the file accordingly? Also, does this require Zillions 2.0 to work properly? I haven't got that so I won't be able to play this myself if it does.
I would like to nominate Yonin Shogi. It is a very capable (not to mention enjoyable) adaptation of the classic Shogi for four players, and its handling of check and mate is unique and opens up a strategic level not available in most other four-handed games.
'Gary, I believe that Manabu Terao and Manabu Terao are two different people as much as I believe that Gus Duniho and Fergus Duniho are two different people.' No offense, but you could have saved some time and just said that in the first place. ;)
It's a shame, really -- I always liked the word 'quintilliard.'
It's too expensive for me too -- although my brother and I would love to get into it. I guess we'll have to wait for a video game release. ;)
If I may clarify Larry Smith's clarification: When one piece captures another, the capturing piece gets all the captured piece's moves, except for those it already had, which it loses instead. It's a bit of a 'toggle' if you will. I tried to say that almost immediately after this game was posted but for some reason the comment system decided it hated me.
Is it just my computer or is the diagram a little squooshed?
The root-65 leaper is known as the Bat in Leaping/Missing Bat Chess. Sorry.
Er, you can never attack your own pieces -- the description for the action specifies that -- so the only way you can damage your own pieces is to get them caught in a self-destruct's radius. And you can self-destruct with more than zero health, if you like. And the only piece that can heal other pieces is the cleric, and they can only heal one other at a time, so unless they have their cleric behind the wall, the wall will most likely retaliate.
New (blank) page created here. Please copy the comments over as well, if possible. Thanks!
Thanks for catching that -- it should be 11 per side. One thing which has just occured to me is that I never defined how much damage Clerics should take -- they're supposed to always take 2 damage (3 if the attacking piece has a same-color bonus) but I apparently never wrote that down anywhere. D'oh. Pieces should be able to move through spaces occupied by friendly pieces only, as in Vantage Master Online, which the game was originally based on. This was also never written down explicitly. Double D'oh. As for the spirit spamming issue, the self-destruct can become valuable in a situation like that -- once your spirit is about to die, you can do extra damage to 'the wall,' and eventually break a hole in it -- if they're really trying to keep up a wall they won't use it themselves, which gives you an advantage. Did you take this into account? (Just the same, I will consider revising the summoning rules.) Is there any way this page could be converted into a 'member-submitted' page so I could edit it?
But but but... the big-eared person with a tie over his nose was just so charming!
I think it would look best with the colors of the wooden one, but without the texture. Just my two cents.
Extremely awkward. The Tripper, Commuter, Threeleaper, and Fourleaper (and Lancer, to a lesser extent) are all bound to a small subset of squares on any size board, and the remaining pieces can be difficult to utilize well due to their large and inflexible movement patterns. This is my opinion, of course.
I have to wonder whether I should be honored for being included in this, or insulted for having something I created be the basis for a section. (Note: this comment is in jest. Kinda.)
The only thing related to 'reclaiming a queen' in Chess is the promotion of a pawn to a queen. For this to happen, the pawn must reach the final row of the board, from its owner's perspective - in other words, get your pawn all the way to the other side of the board, and you can promote it to a queen. (Additionally, the term 'reclaiming' is a bit inaccurate here, because it is possible to get more than one queen by doing this multiple times.)
Probably not too similarly, but it's certainly a good idea. This reminds me, I've been meaning to make a SSBM-styled variant.
I would think that having each player have two of the same thing would still qualify as different armies, but whatever.
Furthermore the game has 'Chess' in the title. ;)
How come one player has two GoldenKeyboards and the other player has one each of Golden and Plastic? Was this intentional?
I have one as well, but have used it so much that the low-quality included cardboard board is starting to fall apart. Not that I'm selling it, of course -- just be wary you may have to find someplace that will make custom gameboards to replace yours, if you find one used. (The pieces, on the other hand, are lovely. Quite heavy, plastic, and felt-bottomed. Very sturdy.) What's all this about selling the property rights? Hopefully someone interested in selling high-quality sets will purchase it -- in my opinion, Omega Chess is one of the best variants in existence!
What's going on, anyway? There's been no announcement of a second round of voting.
'Ostentatious Chess' sounds like a good name for an upcoming submission of mine. ;)
The links to Taratibu and veSQuj seem to be missing. Furthermore, the link to Shatranj Kamil 64 should point to http://www.chessvariants.org/contests/10/shatranjkamil64.html instead of where it does now.
When attempting to use one of the voting pages, I get a screenfull of the following: Warning: main(/home/chessvar/public_html/cgi-bin/rankedpoll/runpoll.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/chessva/public_html/contests/10/poll1-A.php on line 26 Warning: main(/home/chessvar/public_html/cgi-bin/rankedpoll/runpoll.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/chessva/public_html/contests/10/poll1-A.php on line 26 Warning: main(): Failed opening '/home/chessvar/public_html/cgi-bin/rankedpoll/runpoll.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/chessva/public_html/contests/10/poll1-A.php on line 26 Perhaps this should be fixed.
Roberto, I'd like to point out that as of right now, when one Googles 'chessvariants,' the first related page that comes up under the main listing is this Xiang-Qi page. If that isn't a good indicator of this game's popularity variant-wise, if not game-wise in general, I don't know what is. (Incidentally, a search for 'xiangqi' gives this page second in the list, and a search for 'xiang-qi' or 'chinese chess' gives it first.)
It may be helpful on each of the automated voting pages to have 'See Also:' links only to the games in that particular group.
Not to be nitpicky, but the plural of Pokémon is Pokémon. 'Pokémons' sounds rather odd, to me anyways. *has a brother who used to watch the cartoon all the time*
Promoter promotion is prohibited? Perfect. I personally prefer the prohibition of prehension of pieces by Promoters, as it places the promoters in a pacifistic position where their perilous promoting power is best placed in proximity to pieces of your own. Why pick off pieces when your position is productive for the other player?
Can Promoters capture? And can Promoters promote? If so, does a Promoter that promotes a Promoter which previously promoted pieces prolifically pay a pretty penny? Perhaps a pound? Perhaps in practice Promoter promotion proliferates profusely, as the Promoters are positioned in proximity preceeding each play's premiere.
Page updated. Ed, could you please provide your last name so you can be properly credited?
The comment directly below this one is mine. Oops.
Thanks for the offer! I'll email you ASAP. No, I don't have the Yonin page up -- in honesty, I haven't even started it yet. I may upload a quickie version using the new form, but don't expect it to be all that great. (It'll be an English resource, though, which is what matters, and besides, I can edit it later!)
Hey Greg, you lost your bet. ;) I'm 19. Sorry to be so late, computer troubles. Wow, y'all are geezers. :P
I'm just wondering, for those of you who consider yourselves active members here, how old are you? We all know Hans is in his 40s, but that's all. What kind of age range is this group in as a whole?
I had an idea very similar to this one ages ago but completely forgot about it! Good to see it being fleshed out.
I believe that what Mr. Nalls is getting at is that it almost seems that someone is trying to get SPC to do well in the contest by giving it lots of Excellents under different names. Admittedly, I had been wondering myself. I'm not pointing any fingers right now, but whoever it is seems to be getting a little silly. Dead men, after all, do not have internet access.
In the Credits, Etc. section, the 2 in '102' and the 3 in '103' should be superscripts.
I would think that it's based on Cartesian distance, as in Maximummer Chess.
Oops. Yes, the board is 10 by 10, although the document itself does not reflect that.
I previously stated that I would be willing to post my other entry via 'the form'. However, due to a massively underestimated schedule overload (a.k.a. 'last two weeks of school'), I will be unable to do so until no earlier than a week from this Wednesday, and most likely not until Thursday or later.
I edited Yagbap after the deadline only to clarify a couple of things, and didn't actually change the rules as listed. I think that the best thing to do would be to somehow remove the edit option on all the pages for the duration of the contest, if that's possible, and then add them back on when the contest is finished.
Page slightly clarified in Rules and Notes. Also, thanks to whoever added it to the contest index. I trust that my other entry, Countdown, was received, and if it would be more convenient I could attempt to upload it using 'the form.'
This needs to be added to the contest index. Perhaps it would be possible in the future to add 'this is an entry to thus-and-such contest' flags to the submission page? Of course a check would have to be used to see whether 2 entries have already been submitted by the same person.
I think that whatever system we choose to use in the near future, we'll just need more editors to run it. Also, I think the wiki idea wouldn't be that great. If you want a CV Wiki, enter some pages into the Wikipedia. I'd volunteer to be an editor, myself, if I knew enough HTML to be useful.
This isn't some sort of dramatic foreshadowing of the closing of the CVP in the near future due to lack of available manpower, is it? Because if it was, that would be, like, y'know, *totally* uncool.
Is the contest even still going on? I also have an entry in limbo, plus
the commenting system for the contest's page seems to be broken (see my bug report below).
It seems to me that no comments from the 10 Contest page are showing up in the main listing. There are quite a few confused people there waiting for things to happen. On that note, perhaps a priority ought to be made to update the contest, especially since the deadline is not very far away.
Or you could use rooks to represent knights, and knights to represent rooks, and turn one rook upside-down. Or one knight could be tipped on its side. The possibilities are vaguely endless. In all seriousness, this game does sound interesting, if minimal in overall variantage. Whatever happened to the modest variants listing? There have been quite a few variants posted lately that could probably go there. Maybe it's time for an overhaul of said listing.
Perhaps the editors are wary of uploading the 10th entry to this contest because they think that being the 10th entry will give it some sort of intrinsic advantage? ;P
<p>Seriously, though, what's going on?
The link is no longer valid. It works, but the game is no longer where it used to be.
I am going to offer my interpretation/variant of the rules here. This is assuming each player has their own distinct set of quantae, which is how it looks the game is played from the opening setup on this page. A piece is not defined until it is moved, regardless of whether it can be deduced as something or not. In other words, the cycle is not complete until every quantum on the board has moved and been defined. When you move a piece as a rook or bishop, you may choose to define it as a queen, but you must define it as such immediately after moving it. Once a piece of yours has been captured, it's captured, and you can no longer define a quantum to be that particular piece (of course, if you had two of them, and one was captured, you can still use the other one). If a quantum is captured, we don't know what it was going to be, so after every piece of yours has been defined, all the other ones that are still left are considered captured and given to your opponent. Of course, immediately after the last quantum has moved, the cycle ends and each quantum suddenly has the moving power of all the pieces you have left. In other words, I'm for Full Actual resets, but I don't understand fully the difference between Field and Player, so I can't say which I have just stated I prefer. The reason I like this method of play is that it more closely resembles FIDE chess because once a piece is captured, it's removed from play, so for example you can't redefine another quantum to be your Queen if you've already lost your Queen. Just my 2 cents.
'The three Knights are therefore complementary to each other in a similar sense to the two Chess Bishops which operate on complementary squares.'
<p>Technically incorrect. Each bishop in FIDE chess can eventually reach exactly one half of the board. The King's Lancer and Knights can eventually reach any square on the board; the Queen's Lancer cannot.
The rating is for the new layout of the page. One thing I find annoying about it, though, is the way the page instantly jumps to a certain spot whenever you click on anything. In my opinion, it would be easier to navigate if it just sat where it was.
I do find it enjoyable, myself. Of course, having played two games with its inventor may have helped...
Interesting point. I would think the game would be a draw in that scenario.
I didn't say your interpretation was wrong. I was trying to imply that the n in funny notation does not really make sense when we apply it to hippogonal pieces (such as the knight, camel, zebra, etc.) since it does not intrinsically imply the unblocked path a piece must take. By 'move' in my previous comment, I meant 'the device by which a single piece may end the turn on a square different from the one it started on.'
The falcon is similar to a non-leaping Camel + Zebra, except that each move has one of three paths it must follow. In order to say that something is a non-leaping, you must define its movement pattern. Just saying 'non-leaping knight' does not imply that you are using a Mao, or a Moa, or a piece that moves two orthogonally and one orthogonally outward, or even a piece that moves three orthogonally and one diagonally back! All of them have the same end result, but none of them get there the same way.
I have a copy of Gollon's book. I can check this out later today. EDIT: Checked it. The book I'm using is Gollon's Chess Variants Ancient, Regional, and Modern, first edition. According to this book, the starting position and stalemate rules are correct. However, the promotion rule listed here is inaccurate. First of all, pawns do not promote to the piece which started on the promotion space, but to the 'master piece' of that file. In other words, the piece of yours that started in that file is the one that determines promotion, not the one of the opposing army. This only has ramifications in the central two files. Gollon's rules also require the actual piece that started in the file to which the pawn will be moving to have been lost, not just a piece of the type. (The example given is that a pawn cannot promote in the C file until his elephant which started in the C file has been lost.) Additionally, according to Gollon, a pawn may not even move to the last rank unless it is able to promote, which is not stated here.
Also check out <a href='http://www.chessvariants.org/shogivariants.dir/kishogi/kishogi.html'>Ki Shogi</a> for a boardless game.
Omigosh omigosh Daleks! I love it -- truly classic stuff.
<p>Daleks move like Kings and will always move orthogonally towards you if
you are on the same rank or file and diagonally towards you otherwise.
Also you can opt to stay put for a turn, instead of moving. Also, teleporting moves you to a completely random space.
<p>I have a Daleks clone around here somewhere that makes you a smileyface
and the Daleks into generic robots, but some of them (red ones) move two
spaces in one turn.
Fergus, I won't claim to be an artist, and in truth I haven't even looked at the pieces you're talking about up close, but it sounds to me like those white edges would be due to antialiasing against a white background that they were created on. Couldn't you edit them out pixel by pixel? Admittedly that would be time consuming, but it would look much nicer. Just my two cents.
I would just like to point out that I had used Platinum Generals in my previous game, Dai-Ryu Shogi. That being said, I think it is wonderful that someone else likes the concept (and even the name) enough to use them, regardless of whether they independently created them. I hope to try this game soon, preferably via ZoG.
Thanks for your comment and rating. I have noticed a large error in the paragraph by the first wizmate example. The wizard on the left can only execute wizmate by moving southeast. The wizard on the right can only execute wizmate by moving directly west or southwest. Therefore, there are only three possibilities, not eight as I had assumed before taking the king's black-line route into account.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
I'm willing to take on THE DIFFICULT PROBLEM. It most certainly can be done, and I believe I shall try.
Congratulations! How did you choose the name, Paloma? And what does it mean?
In order to call check, the piece must have already been moved and your turn must be over. If, afterwards, you decide that the check is a 'bad move,' you are still stuck with it, as moves cannot be taken back according to the laws of Chess.
Since the name 'Life, the Universe and Everything' contains a comma, the script cannot recognize it. Just a heads-up.
Or, of course, we could have it replace the Queen. This actually sounds the most interesting to me.
Or perhaps have it replace a Knight on the board, and play from there as Pocket Knight.
Roberto: I actually got it from my mother, who ordered a board and a set of wooden pieces from www.yutopian.com. It's not too bad of a set, although it's obviously not professional quality. To stay on topic: Do we have a resource that lists the original Japanese names (and English translations) of the pieces? This page doesn't.
Would it be possible to create a printer-friendly version of this page, without all the links and stuff? I just got a set for Christmas (yay!) and I'd like to keep a copy of the rules with me.
All the same, it would be nice to see who did. If you don't wish to disclose the information, though, why not just come out and say so? I would assume BWII wasn't disqualified and was in fact not voted for well, due to a bad case of rehash disease. I honestly don't know what came over me.
The board is not actually spherical, but rather is a torus with a half-twist.
As stated directly in the moves section: 'As a general rule, the promoted forms of pieces retain the movement powers of their third-zone unpromoted counterparts.' In other words, promotion does not change the third-zone move so much as it changes the domain of the move by extending it back to the first two zones. This also happens to apply to Dai-Ryu.
I had actually thought about that, but eventually decided against it. As it is, the Knights/L.D.s are still the only leaping piece, and besides, I think I've already added enough power to the original Ryu setup with the Platinum Generals/Dragons.
The assumption by the unnamed individual is correct. Also, a link to Ryu Shogi where it is referenced in the rules would be a very good idea. Also, I will not be renaming any pieces in this variant. See, I had this thing called a THEME going.
What happened to Dai-Ryu Shogi? I submitted it several weeks ago...
It seems to me that this concept was taken by Christian Freeling and adapted to fit Grand Chess, where it works almost as well.
It seems to me that Courier Chess has been ommitted from the group of games which can be voted for. Unless this was intentional, I suggest we throw out the current votes and start again with it included.
I agree that Changgi should be on the Classic list. Maybe Makruk and/or Sittuyin as well?
I, too, think Fergus's idea is excellent. I also think that 'time-testedness' is a perfectly good word, and wish I could find more opportunities in which to use it.
Thanks for clearing that up, Fergus. I would also like to point out that Fergus did previously state that new CVs would be added to the RCV list, but on a 'less frequent' than monthly basis. We're not just throwing everything we like on this list.
100 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.