Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I've managed to put in more beautiful diagrams. So what do the letters mean:

For the top diagram: R=Rook;W=Wizard;C=Champion;A=Aanca;G=Griffin;N=kNight (has also a zebra just move);B=Bishop;Q=Queen;P=Pawn

For the bottom diagram: R=Rook;Z=Zebra (has also a ferz just move);L=cameL (has also a wazir just move);E=modern Elephant(ferz+alfil+treaper just move);A=Archbishop;M=Marshall;N=kNight (has also a threeleaper just move);B=Bishop;Q=Queen;P=Pawn

In both games each player starts with a foul in hand. A foul may be placed during a move on a place vacated by a non-pawn piece moved for the first time. A foul imitates the last move of the opponent. A foul my imobilize kingwise adjacted pieces.

What do you guys think about these games, are they better that the originals? Are they good enough to be published?

H.G. I think you are sadly correct, but this doesn't stop my passion for inventing better games if possible!

Regarding my second to last comment I also changed some of the rules of the game!

Well, almost anything that has unambiguously specified rules would be good enough to publish here. Note that for variants like this,which use only 'regular' Chess pieces (i.e. no unusual side effects to the move,or location-dependent moves) it would be easy to put in an 'interactive diagram' that shows the piece moves by clicking the pieces, like at

http://www.chessvariants.com/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSinteractive-diagrams

I just repaired the Design Wizard at the bottom of that page, so you would just have to fill in the board parameters, select the participating pieces from the 'Stock' or 'Pick' menus, (specifying their move in Betza notation if it is not standard), and use them to set up the desired start position. You can then copy-past the HTML text spit out by the Design Wizard into your own submission, and it should show exactly the same diagram as the wizard showed when you requested the HTML from it.

Thanks H.G.

I think I have to do a bit of work with pieces like aanca, and maybe scrape the foul totally as it's difficult to implement- I am refering more to the freezing ability.

I guess I have to learn Betza's funny notation, which is not hard but i don't remember for example how to write a moving and capturing camel+moving ferz. Thanks for the food for thought H.G.

How do I write the AAnca in betza's funny notation?

> a moving and capturing camel+moving ferz

CmF

See for instance http://hgm.nubati.net/Betza.html

and I want my aanca to be able to stop after the wazir move!

Thanks HG, I had already found the funny notation materials!

> and I want my aanca to be able to stop after the wazir move!

This is why I wrote the first W on WyafsW. The yafsW in itself describes a move that starts as a Wazir, and then must additionally ('a') move, spontaneously forking into a slide ('y'), in the forward-sideway direction (i.e. at 45-degree angle) after that.

Thanks, H.G.

Since your object in designing these games is to come up with a viable successor to Chess, I will evaluate them by that criterion. I do not believe that either game you described here has much chance of winning over Chess fans and displacing Chess as the most popular Chess variant. The first one adds pieces that change directions, these being the Griffon and the Aanca. No piece in Chess changes direction partway through its move, because such moves make the game overly complicated, and many players would find direction-changing moves less intuitive. The second game introduces several divergent pieces. Although Chess does have one divergent piece, and CV players are used to the Cannon from Chinese Chess, adding several divergent pieces the way this game does can make things more confusing for players. Also, I don't think that adding a foul (is that like a foul ball in baseball? Or do you mean a fool?) will help make these games more popular. In general, including extra pieces that start off the board can make a game harder to program, and this piece in particular, which seems to be something like the chameleon in Ultima, would decrease the clarity of the game. Just like countless other Chess variants, these games may have niche appeal for people who want something more challenging and complicated than Chess, but I expect they will never fill the niche that Chess currently fills.

Fergus,

I agree with what you said, I'll still try them just for fun, but it's hard to come by a worthy successor.

I meant fool, yes, please pardon my English spelling.

Also all the 3 long jumps are a bit awkward on 10x10. I think they'll work fine on 12x12, but a 12x12 board raises new problems.

Thank you for minding my ideas! It is appreciated.

I'll try the games using HG's diagrams, but I don't think I'll publish them as variants, as spamming variants is not useful. Something I studied and could prove useful is my ability to do machine learning programs, maybe I can come up with clever AI for some variants, and compete with HG and Greg, I don't claim their experience but who was born knowledgeable.

Besides that I have some idea of new variants, so I know that I'm always welcomed here.

P.S.  I haven't forgot to use the spell checker now :).

Okay, good. Here are some additional thoughts I had while out walking. Chess has been finely honed by natural selection to be free of arbitrariness. Every rule and piece in Chess serves a purpose, and none are arbitrary. Since Chess is what won the survival of the fittest among Chess variants, I expect that any variant capable of succeeding Chess would also have to be free of arbitrariness. But most Chess variants differ from Chess through some arbitrary change to it, and they easily get lost in a sea of variants that each differ from Chess in their own arbitrary ways.

Another important feature of Chess is that it remains simple enough to learn by children and by people who are not especially inclined toward intellectual activities. This has been critical to the success of Chess, because this has allowed knowledge of Chess to be transmitted from one generation to the next on a large scale. No variant has a chance of succeeding Chess unless it can be spread in the same way. Whatever it is, it has to be a game that parents who are not especially intellectual will be inclined to teach to their kids. This puts a limit on the size and complexity of games that could potentially succeed Chess.

Notably, these two conditions put contrasting restraints on the size of a potential successor. Since nothing in Chess is arbitrary, making the game smaller would normally involve leaving something out that had been in Chess for an important reason. So, any smaller variant is likely to be arbitrary. The best way to make a non-arbitrary variant would be to increase the size and add some new pieces that fit in with the rest of the pieces. Among my own games, for example, Gross Chess does this well, but its greater size, additional pieces, and somewhat more complicated rules probably put it beyond what many parents would be interested in teaching to their kids.

So, in general, there is a narrow window for games that could possibly succeed Chess. They should be very close to Chess in size and material but differ in some non-arbitrary way that adds interest.

Well, we teach children more and more complicated things, and we have more and more complicated machines to teach us the grand master level. So a 10x10 variant with 24 pieces is really no effort. That is not to be said for increasingly large variants. The point of this discussion was that some games exist and they should look at each other in order to better themselves.

My introduction of the griffin and aanca was somewhat arbitrary, they were the first pieces that came to mind when asking myself about non-queen major rider pieces so I wouldn't repeat the archbishop and Marshall in the other variant. The griffin and aanca are, yes difficult to use pieces.

I think orthodox chess should be always for kids but larger board variants should enter the repertoire of adults.

My main fear is that chess playing actually is a  craft for the machines and for humans we should keep hold off games like Dixit for example. That's not an issue, just something we should be aware of.

To put it in perspective why the dichotomy between homo sapiens and machines. I have a permanent debate with a friend of mine about human intelligence vs machine intelligence. Him, a Dune fan, thinks we should train ourselves like the mentats in order to better ourselves. I think we should base ourselves on robots, eventually, when tech allows it become such beings.

This dichotomy is the seed of my 2 objectives I stated in the beginning of this discussion :

1. What is the next evolution of chess

2. How computer chess should evolve

On the less discussed second matter I think chess variants engines should provide software companies what FORMULA1 GP provides automotive companies. I think variants solving the two matters will be very different, especially in size, but also the aanca or  the zebra can't seem awkward to a machine, it's just a move.

On the matter of contributing to a variant that could be part, among others at the next evolution of chess, today I failed, but all hope is not lost. With all risk involved I'll head towards larger board size, for already grandmaster adults and not kids.

Thanks for your time!

A somewhat different object than replacing Chess is creating a variant for Chess players to advance to. The idea here is something like how some video games work. In many video games, you start out at level 1, then move onto level 2, and so on. At each level, the challenges are different, and they are typically more difficult than at the previous level. Under this paradigm, Chess would be level 1, and then some other variants would consitute advanced levels. If Chess tournaments were structured like this, this could be a viable way of getting recognition for Chess variants without trying to displace the position of Chess.

The problem is that Chess itself has already so many levels of difficulty. But I am convinced that you are on the right track. One could make a phone App where children could play a very simple Chess variant (small board, few piece types) against a weak AI. It doesn't have to be any more complex than Tic TacToe. When they score enough points, (the strength of the AI slowly increasing while they do so), the next level opens by adding an extra (more powerful) piece type, enlarging the board when necessary.

I think Dobutsu Shogi is aiming to be a first step in doing this for Shogi.

That's actually a good idea, Totally displacing chess was never the main purpose as is a very good game. I have newver programmed for mobile but it shouldn't be so hard. An aplication for children is wonderful. But I'm also thinking at something granmaster level, wtih a very strong AI that gives increasingly lower handicaps until impossible levels maybe, where the computer recieves a handicap from the player. That shouldn't block the player though!

Or on second thinking, why not an aplication for children that reaches grandmaster level at high levels of play!

I've made some experiments with those two games. It's actually quite exciting but I blunder pieces way to often! After I get some experience I hope to be able to provide a game of each! For now if you would like to try it yourself here are the scripts:

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=ANBQGWCR
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::e2,,e9
king::::f2,,f9
aanca:A:WyafsW:tiger:b2,,b9
griffin:G:FyafsF:gryphon:i2,,i9
champion::::e1,f1,,e10,f10
wizard:W:CF:mage:d1,g1,,d10,g10
knight:N:NmZ:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.chessvariants.com/membergraphics/MSinteractivedia/betza.gif"></script>
<div style="float:left;margin:0 40px 20px 0;">
<div id="diagram">
files=10
ranks=10
promoZone=3
promoChoice=QNBAMZELR
graphicsDir=http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/alfaerie/
whitePrefix=w
blackPrefix=b
graphicsType=gif
squareSize=54
symmetry=none
pawn::::a3,b3,c3,d3,e3,f3,g3,h3,i3,j3,,a8,b8,c8,d8,e8,f8,g8,h8,i8,j8
bishop::::d2,g2,,d9,g9
rook::::a1,j1,,a10,j10
queen::::b2,,b9
king::::e2,,e9
archbishop:A:BN:cardinal:f2,,f9
chancellor::::i2,,i9
elephant:E:FAmH:elephant:e1,f1,,e10,f10
camel:L:CmW:camel:g1,,g10
zebra:Z:ZmF:zebra:d1,,d10
knight:N:NmG:knight:c2,h2,,c9,h9
</div></div>

Just save from notpad with the html extension and it should work.

@ Fergus et al:

I probably should take it easy right after making one of 4 recommended blood donations per year, but here's a comment on the idea of a game based on increasing levels for Chess + Chess Variants (=CVs):

1. The time control for playing 1 game of chess or a CV naturally should be considered. If the idea is to play to finish in one sitting then a very fast time control per game is required. Alternatively, if the idea is to play over a longer period of time, like Dungeons & Dragons is played indefinitely over many evenings, then a more relaxed time control can be used - much like for Game Courier (which by contrast doesn't compel players to play specific CVs or chess);

2. Some thought should be given to which specific CVs are used for various levels. What criteria to select them is used, and which authority might be consulted to make the final selection of the CVs? Also, perhaps chess and/or the CVs should be cycled through, e.g. if chess is level 1, and nine various CVs are levels 2-10, chess could be played again at level 11, etc. (possibly using the same or different CVs for levels 12-20);

3. The idea of playing against an engine is natural enough, but optionally a player might play against another human, or include some CVs as levels that allow multiple players (perhaps with some or all of them optionally being engines).