Comments by benr

@FergusDuniho

This page has a broken diagram designer image; the URL

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/drawdiagram.php?
code=5--------------6-------------
2%7B%253%7D%7B%252%7D%7B%253%7D2------------
2%7B%252%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%252%7D2-----------
2%7B4%7D%7B%251%7D%7B1BI%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%253%7D2-----------
2%7B%252%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%252%7D2-2%7B%253%7D2------
2%7B%253%7D%7B%252%7D%7B%253%7D2-1%7B%252%7D2%7B%252%7D1------
6-%7B%253%7D2%7B%251%7D2%7B%253%7D------
5-2%7B%251%7D2%7B%251%7D2-----------
1%7B%252%7D2%7B_AS_RO%7D2%7B%252%7D1-----
2%7B%253%7D2-2%7B%251%7D2%7B%251%7D2-----
1%7B%252%7D2%7B%252%7D1-%7B%253%7D2%7B%251%7D2%7B%253%7D-----
%7B%253%7D1%7B%253%7D.%7B%253%7D1%7B%253%7D-1%7B%252%7D2%7B%252%7D1-----
2.2.2-2%7B%253%7D2-----
1%7B%252%7D%7B%253%7D%7B%251%7D%7B_JG_.ROQ%7D%7B%251%7D%7B%253%7D%7B%252%7D1-----------
2.2.2------------
%7B%253%7D1%7B%253%7D.%7B%253%7D1%7B%253%7D-------------
1%7B%252%7D2%7B%252%7D1--------------
2%7B%253%7D2-----
&cols=19&nocoordinates=on&set=alfaerie-many&shape=hhex&board=210.102.021.

(newlines added to prevent a long horizontal scroll) produces the error message

The color number 4 has not been assigned to a color. Make sure you assign color values to every color used.

Presumably this is something like {4}, but then this is another regression in the Designer, and we should seek out other pages that might have the issue. But there are lots of other examples on this page with circled numbers, maybe it's just missing a %? (Have I understood this correctly, that {%4} should produce a circled numeral 4, and that the brackets as well as the percent sign is being URL encoded, leading to the horrendous strings in the source here, like %7B%254%7D?

The Man and Beast series has had broken diagrams for years now, at the fault of changed code in the Diagram Designer, and I am in a position to fix some of them.

The review queue has generally hovered between 3 and 6 months, filling up until I have a few hours free to spend reviewing. I try to review from oldest submission to newest. Fergus recently helped clear out some of the older pages, but I haven't seen Greg around; he may be out for a while. Fergus mostly focuses on the web backend, and H.G. on Interactive Diagrams and now Jocly.

1. Only one ghost can be in hand: do newly captured pieces disappear, or can you decide whether to replace the ghost in hand?
2. Ghosts are captured as normal?
3. Dropping a ghost from hand use a turn?
4. The five turn wait isn't clear to me. A freshly captured piece has to wait 5 turns before returning, but what do you mean by the last ghost part?

This is an interesting theme.

Have you done any testing for balance?

The roll is obligatory, with three exceptions: if the move ends with a check, the piece reaches the last line as rook, bishop or knight, or if a pawn reaches the last line.

The first exclusion as written includes discovered check; is that intended?

The second exclusion sounds like it's there to prevent rolling a pawn and it being stuck; but maybe it fits better to force a roll, and if it lands pawn then the player immediately promotes (chooses a face)?

I've removed the Incomplete Information category. I don't think we include randomness in that definition, just deterministic information that's hidden (?).

I approve of the general idea. I think reviewing the votes for approvals will be important to avoid abuse, and IP address might not be sufficient. But sock-puppet control is hard; hopefully the nicheness of our site will make this less of a concern.

On 1, I'd suggest to keep more than just the last revision, but more-aggressive deletion (compared to the general revision deletion policy, whatever that turns out to be) would be fine. Furthermore, I think removing all the revisions upon approval would be reasonable.

Part of me would like a more nuanced notion of "member" and "contributor" for voting, but I don't have good ideas for it. I think about the Stack Exchange system of "reputation", but I don't think anything we track currently would efficiently represent familiarity with the site and/or chess variant expertise. And as long as editors continue to review approvals, we can handle things. (Should there be a sort of negative vote that members can contribute? "This rule is unclear, please revise before publishing"?) If we move forward with this, we might want to consider raising the publication bar if we see a lot of "low-confidence" votes, as an alternative to limiting voting ability.

Movement diagrams are fixed, but a separate issue: the 0th rank in the setup diagrams.

@FergusDuniho, I think I mentioned this in another comment (on a different page), but don't remember now where or whether a conclusion was reached.

The content of this item's Description should appear in the page content, maybe with some hints as to how such mates are accomplished.

Here too I think it's important to at least say something about expected balance. Can ChessCraft provide automated playtesting?

This description doesn't fit:

smallish ads appear sneakily from bottom, going upward on my screen

and I've never seen such, and I expect they shouldn't be possible.

@A.M.: The What's New page relies on page contents being updated, not just the index information. You can manually update the Last Modification date from the edit index information page.

It's also, I think, miscategorized.

Not Usual Equipment, because you have to differentiate all the pawns.

Not dice: I don't think the use of dice in initial setup randomization counts (precedent?).

Not crossover: blending different chess variants doesn't count (or almost all of them would be in this category); it requires blending with some other, more different, game.

And what does "Price" mean?

The rules are not clear, and in a similar fashion to mathematichess: you assume too much of the reader to understand what you mean instead of what you write.

As in mathematichess, it would probably help to group the rules into logical clusters, instead of the more-narrative style that's here now.

On to specifics:

1. (Not a rule question) Fisher Random was "unsuccessful" at randomizing chess?? Arimaa is random!?
2. Using "Black Swan" as both piece and event is just asking for confusion; the thematic gain is not worth it IMO.
3. When multiple pieces are revealed, the owner gets to choose their placement?
4. Do swans flip/reveal immediately after any move, or do you get to choose??
   1. If the latter, do you have to on the 8th rank?
   2. If the latter, with multiple pieces revealing on 7th/8th rank, can you place a pawn on 8th? If so, does it promote immediately?

Since Black Swans are flipped over one by one, there is not the risk that the board might be jammed, considering that the occurence of Black Swans (events) is only 4 out of 20.

It might be extraordinarily unlikely, but I think it is possible. Might as well say what to do.

This has ended up without a description as I submitted the form in a rush due to some apparently bugged aspects of both logging in and the Submission form (I might describe those further in another comment); the metadata editing form I now have access to was very useful for setting this to be a Piececlopedia page and correctly assigning attribution, but it seems (and I think this has been noted before) it lacks a field for adjusting the Description (as opposed from the, distinct, What's New text); is there any way for me to do this?

Page descriptions can be edited from the editors' Edit Links page ([links]). You should generally modify the Primary link; non-Primary ones are used to display e.g. alternative names in index pages, but are excluded in searches with primarylinksonly=on.

I would create a new page for the modern elephant.

I'd be fine with dropping the Elephant Link entry from this page, if others agree that applying the term elephant to the alfil is outdated (we can always keep a note in the text here and in the new FA page to help direct folks).

How are the pieces introduced to the board? Players alternate turns placing their pieces?

You don't need to separate the pawn and king placements; since they're forced, just place them all at once.

I think the rules are nearly complete now, with one exception: pawns' two-step. Since they only appear later in the game, do they get one, or no? If they do, does it depend on their location and/or limited to their first move, and does en passant exist?

A White Swan coming from the first rank can be flipped over on the second rank, provided there is an empty square to land on. In that case, any White Swan landing on the second rank can be subject to capturing, but only after being flipped over and replaced by the corresponding pieces.

If an enemy piece lands on a square on the second rank, the White Swans from the first rank can capture that piece by a Pawn like move. If this happens, the White Swan will also have to be flipped over and replaced by the piece/pieces they represent, counting as a single move.

These paragraphs don't seem needed anymore; they're natural consequences of the main rule, right?

But this means that the opponent having more roses isn't necessarily good for you, right? It allows them to win by blossoming more readily (even if it allows you to win by checkmate more easily)?

• Clarifying the rules on the Pawn's double step that Reiniger mentioned
  • Does the double step for Pawns also apply to White Swans?

This has already been clarified in the page.

• A distinctive piece image for the Black Swan
• The movement of the Black Swan

Black Swans aren't pieces, but one possible outcome (specifically, any outcome with multiple pieces) when revealing a White Swan.

If a White Swan coming from the first rank gets flipped over on the second rank, it can be subject to capturing.

This should be in the Rules section in my opinion, if it is meant as a rule. You may want to be careful with this though, as you may encounter a problem with having to keep track of which White Swan started where, and thus which ones are able to be captured.

Actually, this seems to be nonsense and could just as well be removed. A white swan moving from anywhere immediately gets replaced; since it no longer exists, there's no point in saying anything about its being subject to capture.

The chess board is already too small. Why would you make it even smaller?

I particularly like small or mini variants.

As the author emphasized in their last comment, the conditions apply "After your move".