[ 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?
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.