Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
'At last I've rediscovered the variant that uses the Noclaf and Retnuh - you'd have been perfectly entitled to tell me earlier in a comment on Man and Beast 21...'
True, and I would have had I known you were searching for those pieces. But be assured that I was not withholding information. I was ignorant of the fact that there were 21 Man and Beast articles. I only noticed the Noclaf Retnuh comment of yours because I received a 'Gryphon Aanca Chess' e-mail notice of a comment.
I did, moments ago, briefly look through number 21 and was amazed at how much content you have there. Unfortunately they have no selection 'Amazing' in the rating box so I will have to postpone a possible rating. I will go back later and read M and B 21 in its entirety and then possibly read the first Man and Beast and then, perhaps others. Thank you for taking all the time and energy gathering and putting together what looks to be a great amount of piece-related information.
Hero-Schmero. The core fundamental ones, brilliant Bent Hero and Bent Shaman open new class p-ts, optional sequential, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSlemurianshatra. Moving as D+W, W+D, W, or D; other one as A+F, F+A, F, or A -- the Joycean inventions. Joe once asked Gilman where they would fit in M&B articles. The answer is they don't, because there is no sequential piece category yet. There could be untold thousands of other new p-ts just pairing repetitively any two old ones: Knight and Alfil, Wazir and Bishop.... Not compounded but sequed optionally like the bent hero and shaman. And they all shall be named. In the David Howe ''Concise Guide...'' they constitute subclass of Double Movers because second leg is not enforced. When the piece-type category gets going, Charles in some M&B25(?) can fittingly use *reduplication*. Grammatically reduplicative, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplication), examples: bow-wow, hear-hear!, (suffixed) yum yummy, (second order) hunkie-dunkie, (add-on Yiddish) Santa Schmanta. Many CV names already use reduplication: Zig Zag, Abracadabra, Hanga Roa, Tutti Frutti Falcon Uti, Ubi-ubi. Still other words exist not accepted CV lingo yet: Killer Diller, Razzle Dazzle, Rowdy Dowdy, Yin Yang (3rd order), spooky wooky. Any reduplication can become standard CV talk eventually as CV or as piece-type. Okie-dokie, in M&B26 or so the premier duo of the subclass Joyce started formalize to any two of: Hero Schmero Zero, Layman Shaman. Tip top.
On account of ongoing revisions per suggestions, years 2006-2012 M&Bxxs to some extent belong to all. There is no piece category yet for innovative Bent Hero and Shaman, http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSlemurianshatra. Year 2011 ''Concise Guide...,'' for example, includes Double Pieces, who require two legs of same type per turn. That would be strict subclass of Sequential, and Joyce's brilliancies are implicated *Optional Sequential* p-ts. However the distinct categories happen to overlap among several that are related, there are thousands upon thousands newly to name, given these general plural Movers for generating piece-types. Some equivalent to M&B30 to M&B39 could be devoted to PLURAL/SEQUENTIAL/DOUBLE piece-type super-Class. They of inventive Joyce are that important as effective avenue to the higher boards. ____________That is, play on 16x16 256, the lower bound of extremely large, is enhanced by preserving elemental units. In fact, 256-square embodiments to date deleteriously over-stress long-rangers. On 256 squares Dabbabah is dwarfed but 'Dabbabah + Dabbabah + Dabbabah optional third leg' very effective minor piece. Note like Hero and Shaman there is change of direction. 'D+D+D-optional' can go up to six squares and cross the 16x16 in three with room to spare. To name it, 'DaDaDay' is that piece-type by reduplicative modus operandi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplication. In DaDaDay 'y' suffix means optional final leg, because the 'io' in optional is 'y' by sound. Doubling or tripling syllable or word connotes the move itself within nomenclature for the Class Sequential. So any optional final leg to arrival square ends in '-Y', else if enforced for a given p-t no 'Y': the latter DaDaDa or meaning the same thing descriptive 'DaDaDabbabah', also a grammatical reduplication (mathematical iteration). This is unexplored Gilman territory and Betza funny notation is too truncated to see it. Two distinct types then so far: DaDaDa and DaDaDay, and both cling to the root Dabbabah. When the legs are different, it is now inconvenient to use both roots (Gilman excepted) in that there are many suitable reduplications to draw on and devise for these all new unnamed p-ts of different-sequed movements. English-only examples: rolly polly, howdy doody, willy nilly, gooble gobble, boogie woogie, Duke of York, wig wam. This way every reduplication whatever language could become CV jargon as needed since sequential p-ts are more or less inexhaustible. Over time the feedback loop becomes homeostatic two-way: any linguistic become CV or type and any CV-invention recharging whatever and however many languages far removed.
Okay, George, you've drawn me out briefly. Thanks for the kind mention of a pair of my pieces. As minimalist short range power pieces, I think they do their job. Certainly one of my better bits of spot design in the shatranj series. For what it's worth, I continued working on the piece series in the CVwiki. Much credit [or blame] goes to David Paulowich, who spent some time discussing the basic ideas. I had to extend Betza notation to cover these rather strange pieces, and have managed a few descriptive notations of existing pieces, although it doesn't cover any of the longer ranged pieces mentioned below. http://chessvariants.wikidot.com/joe-s-strange-notation And the multiply-leaping dabbabah with optional turn on last step I've been calling a daisy, as it has a stalk of varied length and a differentiated 'head'. The discussion is buried on the Pond Scum page. [Graeme was right, I should change that page name.] Anyway, allow me to copy directly from the wiki: Daisies 'A daisy is a stalked plant. Maybe the stalk is short, and maybe the stalk is long, but the stalk always grows first, then the flower can bloom at the end of the stalk. Stalks are Dabbabahs and Alfils; they can grow any length. Flowers are Wazirs and Ferzes, they only happen at the end of the stalk. You may have a stalk length of zero squares, giving the pieces just the wazir or ferz move. A stalk length of two squares gives the hero and shaman. This piece might be nice for breaking into defended areas as its range increases. The movement track is a saw-toothed pattern.' David Paulowich and I were discussing a piece of this idea a while back, a 3-step dababbah-rider [a linear piece], and he was the first to suggest in print that the final step could be bent, so I promised I'd give him this much-deserved mention. I'd generalize it to 'the last leap made can be bent', and add it to my rules mix here, for sure. You've got some options in combining daisies with the Paulowich bend. you can keep the 2 piece-types separate you can allow one piece both options, but not on the same turn you can allow a piece both options on the same turn - you might consider limiting the total range of this really nasty move. 1/10/08 [cont from above] Let's start with 2 pieces, a 'matched pair' of DW and AF, along with their leaders. The DW7 WarMachine - This piece may move in a straight line as a dababbah 7 times; or may move 6 times as a dababbah and once as a wazir, in a straight line. It may move 5 times in a straight line as a dababbah, then once as a dababbah or once as a wazir, in any direction. It may move 4 times in a straight line as a dababbah, then once as a dababbah and once as a wazir, in any [1 or 2] directions. Another option would allow the piece to choose a wazir move at any [or every] step of its move. Clearly, you could alter movement specs - just for example, anyone would be able to figure out what a DW6 or DW8 was, and how it worked. The AF7 WarElephant is the diagonal equivalent of the orthogonal WarMachine, jumping 2 squares diagonally as an alfil or stepping 1 square diagonally as a ferz, and getting 'the Bends' with the same costs and restrictions as the warmachine. The move as ferz any or every step is also the same. The DWAF7 General is the leader unit. It also moves up to 7 steps, as either the WarMachine or WarElephant, above, with these exceptions. It has no movement penalty for making its 2 'bent' moves, it may always move up to 7 steps. It may, in place of a standard 'bent' step, switch movement modes: if it was moving as a DW, it may move once [or twice] as an AF, and vice-versa.
This crazed chess variant is so out of my league; either the author is completely insane or full-on autistic, I have no idea.
13 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Do you mean, 'rather than a Sultan's Wazir'?