Comments by MichaelNelson

A question for you, H. G.: is there a document somewhere describing your latest research into the value of chess pieces?

The Excellent is both for Fairy-Max itself, and for your work on Chess engines and piece value.

There is an error in the initial setup in this preset (taking Betza's page as correct): exchange the k-file bishop with the l-file piece to get the setup Ralph intended.

The rules as given make the answer to the first question clear: checkmate ends the game immediately (if the checkmating move is legal) per the FIDE rules which apply to this game unless otherwise stated; so what would have happened after is irrelevant. Win for the checkmating player.

The second is unclear--an already stoned piece ignores the effect of being zapped, but does stoning undo the effect of a wand which the piece had been zapped with on a previous turn? This is not limited to the sickness case. For example, does stoning a pacifist piece allow it to resume capturing after the stoning wears off?

I would answer no to the second question, but am far less sure than in the firs question that my understanding of Ralph Betza's intent is correct. If my interpretation is correct, a stoned King will die at the appointed time, as it is now immune to a wand of healing--so the only recourse available to the king's owner is to checkmate, stalemate, or create a second king before the king dies.

I am playtesting the following changes to the Pocket Mutation Chess value classes:

Class 1: Pawn

Class 2: Knight, Bishop

Class 3: Rook, Nightrider

Class 4: SuperRook, SuperBishop*

Class 5: Queen, Chancellor, Cardinal*

Class 6: SuperChancellor, ChancellorRider, SuperCardinal*, CardinalRider*

Class 7: Amazon, SuperChancellorider, SuperCardinalRider*

class 8: AmazonRider

Those pieces marked with * have been move up one class.

I have been motivated by H. G. Muller's research which shows a higher value for the Cardinal than Betza's Atomic Theory would predict--it is essentially equal to a Chancellor or Queen, rather that about halfway between a Chancellor and a Rook as Betza suggested.

I am contemplating adding a SuperKnight (KN, class 4?) and maybe a SuperNightrider (KNN, class 6?). Any thoughts?

The page cleaned up nicely!

Definitely reverse the values of bishop and rook. I suppose the prohibtion on splitting the last king even to form another king is to limit the king's mobity, else last king facing capture could move as a split off a bishop and fuse with a rook all the  way accross the board. I wonder if this prohibition is needed for playabilty. My guess is that the case where my king is captured, I capute the enemy king, but opponent can't form a new king on the next turn would be a draw. I think I would prefer the simpler rule "a player who has no king at the start of his turn loses."

 I was able to sign in using Microsoft Edge with blanet permission to accept all cookie anywhere (the default for Edge).

A very well thought and pleasing out blend of a Capablanca's Chess and Shogi. I am curious about the rule against having identical promoted pieces other than promoted Pawns. I consider it a small wart on a otherwise perfect design.

Correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't rule 3 imply that a player with a bare king is stalemated, even if he has legal moves, since he's not allowed to move his king twice in the same turn?

Very nice touchup of the page. You might have mentioned that in problems, there is more than one way to use the cylinder concept. The one here described is chess on a horizontal cylinder, which is the only form that is playable as a game. Other forms have appeared in problems: the vertical cylinder with the first and last ranks connected and the anchor ring both basically both a vertical and horizontal cylinder simultaneously. In the latter case, a1 is connected to both a8 and h1 (and in some version h8 as well, if you really want to go crazy). With rooks and queens instantly attacking each other and the kings in mutual check, we'd need special rules to play this, but a KBB vs K ending on such a board can be analyzed, as well as more complex problems.

Can the Royal Bishop move across attacked squares? A Chess King when castling cannot, neither can the Royal Queen in the excellent Cassia Britania. I'm assuming the same limitation applies to the Royal Bishop, but the piece description should explicitly say one way or the other. Example, can a Royal Bishop on e5 move to g7 which is not attacked even though f6 is?

A much better player than Zillions. I notice that version 2.2 is scriptable, and the scripting language looks easier than Zillions' Lisp-based scripting language (which is a monumental pain in the a** to debug--all those nested parens). Does ChessV have a scripting reference? I'd love to see it rather than ask a thousand questions in this thread.

I notice the download link for the Decima .zrf is broken. I am downloading .zrf's for my games and some others, this is the only one missing.

The page should be ready for publication now. I have a working .ZRF, but it needs a bit of polishing.

I'm looking for a good name for a piece that moves one square as a Wazir and then continues as a Crooked Bishop. I am using this piece in a game where the four basic piece types are two leapers, one color-bound, and one color-switching; and two sliders, one color-bound, and one color-switching. Three of my basic pieces are Bishop, Knight, and Camel. I devised an approximately Rook-valued piece that is always color-switching. I would also be interested in possible alternative pieces that are color-switching and approximately Rook-valued.

I have invented a new variant and have a working .zrf. I don't have a satisfying name for it. (Rather reminiscent of my first variant Separate Realms.)

The essential idea is to use four basic pieces, two leapers, and two sliders. One of each type is color-bound, and the other is color-switching.

For the leapers, I have the Knight and Camel, and the Bishop is the obvious choice for the color-bound slider. For the color-switching slider, I'm using Jörg Knappen's Harvestman from Seenschach, which moves a wazir and then continues as a crooked bishop.

Also, simple pieces can combine with captured enemy pieces as in Assimilation Chess, but the compounds do not split, and there are no King compounds.

So Gnu, Cardinal, and Caliph can appear as well as three Harvestman combinations I've never seen before. I've named the Bishop compound the Metropolitan (a title used in Eastern Orthodoxy for a prelate ranking above an archbishop but below a patriarch). The Camel compound is the Imam, which has the property of mating a bare King on an empty board unassisted. I haven't done the endgame studies to see if mate can be forced. The Knight compound is named Battlemaster, after the Fighter subclass in D&D 5e.

The Harvestman is a good Rook substitute on the whole, though not as good at forcing mate. It does however move in a general rook-like direction with greater mobility. Intuition says this is a reasonable trade-off.

The game is played on a 9x9 board with normal Pawn movement including promotion at the enemy Pawn line rather than the back rank, allowing very FIDE-like Pawn play. Castling is forbidding, so the King is very exposed in the center of the back rank. This is rather reminiscent of Shogi.

A very playable game judged by Zillions vs. itself play. Now I need a name, and I can change some piece names if that fits the theme better.