Comments by CBagleyJones

thanks to Antoine Fourriere and Larry L. Smith for helping make this game
playable with zillions, it is a magic game. i already commented on this
game here
http://www.chessvariants.org/index/msdisplay.php?itemid=MSthetravelers

lol, well at least you picked a good name :)

when viewing your game, if you click on 'piece set' you can change to
'alfaerie' and that shows western style pieces.
you don't have to open your email to play, go to game logs here 
/play/pbmlogs/index.php
type your userid and password, and you will see your games, just click on
your name and away you go.
good luck :)
give 'em trouble he he :)

Namik probably didn't realise that he was doing anything wrong, what i
can't understand is why chessvariants site even put the game up!
if you talked to the guy first, he probably would of changed name ...

i dunnoooo, i think the inventor of shatranj is gonna be upset about this
:)

Joe, seriously, no one should take me seriously, i, too, am not releasing
a game called 'grand shatranj' or 'great shatranj', let alone having
those names with numbers. i think there would be no problem whatsoever
releasing a game with those names, and also, no problem using the 'grandchess' 
set up played with the ancient pieces. 
i highly doubt Mr Freeling would care.
i mean seriously, Mr Bird actually created 'capablanca chess', look at
all the similiar variants that followed.

http://www.chessvariants.org/graphics.dir/galactic/galactic.html
free

wow this game is lots of fun, i never realised how much fun it could be with
dice, though the computer does play some really really bad moves
sometimes, that isn't your fault.
all you need to do is take back it's move and play the right move for it,
if it is really obvious.
it would be good to also put a variant out where there are no teams,
everyone against everyone, with dice, with this set up.
yes i've seen your up-coming 'shatranj' 4 player, looking forward to
it.
anyway, great game, pretty funny, heaps of fun, i feel lucky with the dice
concept, he he, so i especially love it. 
good job, oh, graphics are great too, nice 'enlarge board'.

i love these multi player games, i had never seen this set up before.
good job.

there is an error in 'help' with the elephant (bishop), it gives the
moves of this piece as 'leaps 2 diagonally'
great to see this game with the graphics you use, nice little collection
you got going.

yeah no, you know more about making zrf's than me, the ship is strange
sometimes, no doubt, but i have noticed that zillions plays multi player
variants pretty bad, i think you should be happy it actually plays as good
as it does.
yeah, the ship, sometimes it passes on a move, when it could move from
it's start position to a square that is attacking an enemy king, and that
is the least of it's bad moves i've seen he he :)
i've noticed you say that this variant is only best playing with dice,
though i don't know why you say that.

yes, it is true on the first move, the 1st player can check with ship, and
then check with pawn, and this players team mate can do the same, but
believe it or not, this is a bad opening for the players giving check!
they will lose a pawn, and have the worst position.
the king in this game, can safety move in the open, because of no queens
or bishops. Look at this example. (i'll call the bishop a ship)
1.Ship a1-c3, King a5-b4, Ship h8-f6, King h4-g5
2.h2-h3, King b4-c5, h7-h6, King g5-f4
now whatever the first player plays, he cannot stop the 2nd player taking
his 'a' pawn (with rook) because the 4th player can check next move!!
:)) 
it is the old 'i can this crazy looking move, cause my team mate can check 
you next move', a common tactic in 4 player chaturanga.

i think the rating system in place is just fine, what is the point of
'neutral', what is that, it isn't even a rating, and isn't 'none'
pretty much the same.
i don't think it should be taken too seriously, if it is to be,
non-members shouldn't be allowed to rate, and they are, which is fine by
me too btw.
to rate a game, as suggested a couple of comments down, as '-6 Beneath
Contempt' and '-5 Contemptible' and '-4 Loathsome' and '-3 Hideous'
and 
'-2 Miserable' etc etc is really bad taste, and i hope this site does
not fall to this level.
there are competitions to judge the best games anyway, or the games people
nominate at least.

who wants to rate a game 'beneath contempt' anyway lol