Comments by JorgKnappen

This is a late reply ... the bent riders that are not bent are in fact long known, problemists call them slip pieces (slip-R, slip-B, and slip-Q). The slip-R is also known under the name Panda and plays with this name in the S(w)eeping Switchers army for CwDA (2002).

Another late reply: Yes, before having an account here I signed by comments with "--JKn". Afaik, no one else did.

No. The move zero rule is only to prevent an immediate tactical threat, but not a measure to correct the strength of an army. The additional tempi gained by the move zero rule are worth about one third of a pawn.

Great that you rediscovered the 135-degree-rose. I did not name it back in 2002 but I don't like the name "Worsen" – to me it only sounds like a verb with the meaning "to make worse; to become worse".

I suggest "Rose of Jericho" for this piece. The move pattern reminds me to the ball shape of that plant in dried up state.

HaruN Y rediscovered the 135-degree-rose recently and named it "Worsen"

https://www.chessvariants.com/index/listcomments.php?id=56364

I don't like this name, I suggest "Rose of Jericho" instead.

Charles Gilman explored those pieces and assigned some more names in the game "Commedia dell'Arte Chess"

https://www.chessvariants.com/rules/commedia-dellarte-chess

I just noticed that piece I name Fischer here was used by Jason D. Wittman, 2000, Mad Chess. It is called Unicorn there.

I just discovered that this game contains the Unicorn, a piece that I later used as Fischer in 10-directional Chess. I have added a credit note in the comment of this game.

It does not matter that the leapers don't promote because pieces are never taken out of the game forever, they all return via drops. The stronger player always has enough pieces to checkmate.

The game with ALoR has a completely different dynamic than the original Lines of Relay. A local material advantage on one side creates aggressive tactical potential and the game can be over very quickly.

I designed the original LoR to be balanced: Moving a Queen to the file h would mobilise both Lore Apprentices, not only the own one.

Well, but not very human readable, one has to decode cryptic things like

customPiece3 = r:GH

what is perfectly OK as an instruction for a CV engine, but it is not a note adressing human readers.

The banner still says "Check out Janggi (Korean Chess), our featured variant for November, 2024.". Should read "December" here, shouldn't it?

Did you find a decisive tactical thread, and if yes, against which army?

I do not like the renaming of the piece to "Lancer" because that name is already taken: Problemists have named the (2,4)-leaper lancer. The name is also dangerously close to the piece named Lance in standard Shogi.

Is it really the combination of Maorider + Moarider that you describe here

Moorider: afz(afzafz)K

Or does your description allow the rider for each step choosing again between Mao and Mao steps? A simple combination piece must choose one step pattern (Mao or Moa) for all of its steps.

I have found my notes with a longer list of games with the Knight-Wazir combination piece (Emperor/Marquis)

Here are the games:

Plays in Thronschach, 2000. Glenn Overby II. Called 'Marquis'.

Appears in Gerneric Piece Creation System, 2000, Guilherme S. Töws. Called 'Marquis'

Plays as a royal piece in Mad, 2000, Jason D. Wittmann. Called 'Stone King' or simply 'King'

Plays in Achernar, 2003. Roberto Lavieri. Called 'Grand Horse'.

Plays in veSQuj, 2005. Glenn Overby II. Called 'Brigadier'.

Plays in Lùotuoqí, 2005. Various authors. Called 'Mule'.

Plays in Opulent Chess, 2005. Greg Strong. Called 'Knight'.

Plays in Nova Chess, 2003. Michael Howe. Called 'Cavalier'. [Note: Contribution retracted and no longer available. I still have a printout on paper]

I think I get it as such: The pawns starting from rank 1 (9) get recharged on rank 2 (8). On field e1 is the King, so no rule for row e is needed. Skipping rank 2 seems possible, but why should a player make such kind of move? This recharging is a king of gate-in where the pieces to be gated in are already present as pawns on the initial board.

Playing around with the interactive board I start appreciating this great invention. It looks like Chess in the first sight, but it is so different!

Knights are colourbound, Bishops are colourswitching, but both pieces keep control over their original target squares, provided there is a fall-back square behind. All pieces are more powerful in the endgame compared to the normal Chess men. One rook can mate unassisted and forced, one bishop and a king mate against a lone king.

Some open questions, to one who has access to the original sources for that game:

Is castling really allowed while rooks cannot move along their base lines? It fells like cheating even more than in standard Chess.

Can rooks and queens pass a move (going one step orthogonally forward and fall back)?

Can rooks and queens capture by igui a piece in front of them ending on their starting square (can only be a pawn)?

It is plain spam, in this case placed in the person information. It doesn't matter if it is placed by hand or automatically.

Usually this kind of spam consists in creating a personal profile only, and because no none notices that personal profile it is considered usually harmless. But in this instance the spammer tries to stir up attention by posting well-formed nonsense in the comments.

The moderators of this site should act appropriately.