Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Opulent Lemurian Shatranj. Joe Joyce's Shaman and Hero pieces are now on a larger board. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Joe Joyce wrote on Sat, Jun 2, 2007 06:38 PM UTC:

This is a most excellent game that for obvious reasons I cannot officially rate, very, very different from my game, Lemurian Shatranj. It is a typical Paulowich production, extremely well-crafted and thought out, providing a nice range of pieces to play with. Exchanges of pieces with similar values can easily lead to a 'chess with different armies' type of game, where standard rooks and knights can be facing some of the twistiest pieces found on western chessboards. This would be an excellent tournament game, as it allows for a broad scope of tactics and strategy. I recommend it highly, and am pleased and proud it features 2 of my pieces, in a setting quite different than the one in which they first appeared. Try it. You'll like it.

George Duke wrote on Tue, Jun 10, 2008 12:08 AM UTC:Good ★★★★

Only one Comment so far; there appear conveniently piece values. This Comment is only from momentary perusal. War Elephant is the same as Free Padwar from Jetan, states Joyce. For those, one has to go to Larry Smith's legendary article covering all possible interpretations. We recognize now Bent Shaman and Bent Hero as two-path, their becoming more instinctive, like several interpretations of Jetan pieces. Now actually one piece may have differing number of paths to different squares. Sissa, being Commented simultaneously, is especially interesting in being precisely two-path and four-path at the same time. It depends on its particular arrival squares. Hero and Shaman (both 'Bent' by our appellative preference) are either one- or two-path contingent upon squares in question. Maybe so many mid-range movers struggle on so large board.

Kevin Pacey wrote on Thu, Mar 1, 2018 08:51 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★

A fine 10x10 Shatranj style variant to add to the others on CVP.

H. G. Muller wrote on Fri, May 7, 2021 07:59 PM UTC:

satellite=opulem files=10 ranks=10 graphicsDir=/graphics.dir/alfaeriePNG/ promoZone=1 promoChoice=G*H*R*S*W*N holdingsType=1 squareSize=50 graphicsType=png lightShade=#FFFFCF startShade=#70B09F rimColor=#0F0F90 coordColor=#EFEF1F borders=0 firstRank=1 useMarkers=1 stalemate=win pawn::fmWfcF::a3-j3 knight:N:::c2,h2 war elephant::FaF:elephantferz:d2,g2 rook::::b2,i2 bent shaman:S:AFmpafaFampafF:bentshaman:d1,g1 bent hero:H:WDmpafaWampafW:benthero:a1,j1 general::K:guard:e2 king::K::f2

Opulent Lemurian Shatranj

Christine Bagley-Jones wrote on Sat, May 8, 2021 04:13 AM UTC:

When you click on the 'Hero' at a1, it can go to c4, and also the War Elephant on d2 can go to f1.
This isn't right is it.

H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, May 8, 2021 05:59 AM UTC in reply to Christine Bagley-Jones from 04:13 AM:

When you click on the 'Hero' at a1, it can go to c4, and also the War Elephant on d2 can go to f1. This isn't right is it.

Refresh your browser cache(Shift + reload). There was a bug in the Betza parser of the diagram that caused this. The directional modifiers of a continuation leg are normally interpreted in the (8-fold) K system, so that even on 4-fold aoms like W or F you can use fs to get a 45-degree bent. But absence of any directional modifier in a continuation leg is defined as 'all directions except back to the square you came from', and the meaning of 'all' should only be 'all orthogonal' if the original atom was 4-fold. So that aF means two F steps in arbitrary direction, not an F step followed by a K step. The diagram was allowing the latter, though, and I had to fix that.

6 comments displayed

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.