Single Comment

First comment here for Gilman's Generalized Generals. (1)If you think of new Pawn or Pawn enhancement to mid-power piece, chances are up to 50-50 it has already been named or catalogued by Gilman. (2) If you think of any Mutator you imagine you've invented, probably Betza already has it described, or else Neto; or Betza inspired someone else to implement such Mutator by now. For these are the end times. (3) FERZ triangulates in cubes but not in squares. That is because in cubes Ferz uses any edge including ones orthogonal to each other. (4) SEABISHOP sounds like the great thoroughbred Seabiscuit 1933-1947. Suppose SEABISHOP in cubes to be ROOK + FERZ + SALTIRE. (Gilman may correct the name for this related tri-compound; using the example does not hinge on the name per se.) SALTIRE from 'M&B01' references with POINT and CROSS. We are talking cubic now and Gilman cleverly goes back and forth by way of SD and ND, so we get used to all geometries at once. Back at 'M&B01' just view a cube from front and POINT is in your face through faces, just that, Point-like one-stepping Wazir-like. CROSS SD in the same orientation, staring into the face of a cube looks like cross Bishop-like, and SALTIRE ND is triagonal one-stepper ''cross-wise'' to your same eyes. All these are FO (Forward) because we already have their omni-directional names as Wazir, Ferz and Viceroy (M&B01). (5) Returning to 'M&B04', why have a rather weak FO SALTIRE with strong Rook and all-way Ferz in tri-compound SEABISHOP? Because it makes just as much sense to have all three directions as only 2 of 3 built in. The logic of 3-D is either orthogonal, or diagonal, or triagonal, or else all three in a piece-type; the only other possibilities being o-d and d-t and o-t. Gilman calls 'd' SD standard diagonal and 't' ND triagonal, that I use in ''Multi-path Chess Pieces.'' We'll have to merge somewhat later Betza's Funny Notation and Gilman's in areas of overlap and also where Gilman diverges from concise Betza linguistics. (6) When you have symmetric and FO compounds in any geometry, the FO aspects may get fresh start over and over after the symmetric leg ''backpedals'' as much as possible in actual play. Gilman in 'M&Bxxs' seldom discusses actual play except formally as triangulating etc. (7) Gilman is saying in the paragraph starting ''Now it gets complicated'' that some CVs other than Tunnelshogi and 3DMinishogi have illogical promotions. What are they?