Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I think the new system is much better, but some instructions at the top would also help (e.g. "Click on icon of piece of choice" for the current system).

It may also help to have a unique highlight color for the promotions in the current system, such as magenta or the blue you use for Chess-style promotions.

• c1, n1 Ferocious Luopard (FvW)

I hope, you meant to say Leopard. 

I now improved the new Diagram script for recognizing checkmates faster, and it now deals with the opening threats 1.Pj6 and 1.Pj6 SE11n 2.BGi6 at 2.5 ply. It also punishes the wrong defense 1.Pj6 o11?

This version uses marker symbols for indicating the promotion/deferral choice. What do you think?

Hmm...I think simply showing the promotion options with a highlighted background is better. The plus and minus don't really tell me what my choices are (they are basically covering up the images), but do better at showing that a promotion option exists.

Personally, I'd omit the markers and highlight the background with the same color that is used for Chess-style promotions (#8080FF), while also showing instructions at the top (e.g. "Click icon of piece of choice").

Perhaps the color for promotion highlights could even be set with a parameter (e.g. promoHighlight=#8080FF) in case the selected board shades are too similar to the default color.

P.S. Also, it would be really nice to be able to deselect a piece in the holdings like you can with pieces on the board. Currently, this is not possible.

OK, how about this?

Much better.

However, I did notice a bug that causes the promotion choices to replace pieces on the squares they are shown on if you select something other than a promotion choice.

Replication Example: Have a Rook General capture the opposing Rook General, and then when the promotion options show up click on any occupied space other than the highlighted squares.

However, I did notice a bug that causes the promotion choices to replace pieces on the squares they are shown on if you select something other than a promotion choice.

OK, fixed that.

Finding the mate threats is also significantly sped up in this version, by the use of a mate-killer heuristic: once it finds a checkmate it searches the same sequence of its own moves first in order to refute alternative opponent moves. As in large variants almost all moves do the same (namely nothing to address the problem), that makes their refutation almost optimal, and partly compensates for the slowdown by lines with checks in them being searched deeper.

The search algorithm now extends the depth a full ply for the first check evasion it tries, (at any depth, not just at the horizon), and half a ply for alternative  check evasions. After 1.j6 it now finds 1... SEn11 after 1.6, 3 of 4.6 sec at 1.5/2/2.5 ply. After 2.BGi6 it then finds 2... m11 in 12 or 33 sec (2/2.5 ply). After 1... o11? it finds VGn9! in 8.6 or 14 sec (2/2.5 ply). Not yet with a mate score, but because it sees the opponent has to sac its GG to push the mate over the horizon. At 3 ply it does get the mate score in 18.6 sec.

[Edit] Oh, and the Diagram had a bug. FD and +WB did not burn when capturing other FD, because there was one @ to few in their row of the capture matrix (for the empty square). Fixed that too.

The Wikipedia page on this game was changed to reflect your remarks on the range-jumping rankings to allow jump-capture of royalty. So I will do the same here. The GC preset already reflects this.

I will also make an interactive diagram with your pieces and put it on the page, and fix some typos I found.

[Edit]: Update of article successful. Working on the Interactive Diagram.

Interactive Diagram successfully inserted. However, Water Buffalos that promote to Fire Demon immediately burn surrounding enemies, which should not happen. Is there a way I can fix this without needing to modify the source code itself?

I am not so sure this should not happen. I am in fact pretty sure the historic rules were that burning would occur in this case. Any other rule open a can of worms in terms of inconsistencies, and additional rules needed to resolve those..

Alright then. I will revise this page and the GC preset to reflect this.

Since this page and the corresponding preset was changed to reflect the current consensus, I will update Nutty Shogi's page and preset to match, since it is based on Tenjiku Shogi.

The move of the fire demon is different between jocly and Interactive diagram.

It seems to me that the vertical movement was a deliberate choice, even if it's different on some sites (wikipedia). I don't know if the consensus has changed, but it would be nice to harmonize the two implementations.

Well, this game has the problem of having lacunae in the historical sources. The current Tenjiku Jocly preset uses the ruleset from Richard's PbEM server.

This looks good for the most part. A couple things I would like to point out though:

Your Fire Demon graph does not match any of the descriptions Tenjiku players use.

Your Vice General graph does not show the range-jumping properties like the other jumping General graphs do, so people might assume it is a normal slider.

The rules forget to mention the restriction against jumping over a King or Prince.

I made a quick modification for Vice General graph and the jumping restriction (same link).

I'm not sure I understood the remark about the fire demon : the graph reflects the movement chosen in the implementation and the icon corresponds to the latest sprites to my knowledge (included in the zip). Concerning the choice of movement, I also noticed that there were several versions.

We'd probably have to make a choice at the level of chessvariant for reasons of consistency. Personally, I can't say which one is best for the game.

The Fire Demon was always depicted with diagonal slides, which your graph lacks.

Also, it seems you missed the graph for the Free Eagle. The preset on CVP uses the same move described in this page.

Indeed, I made the correction (same link).

Thanks

The Fire Demon graph looks good. It doesn't match the move described on this page, but this is acceptable due to the lacunae in the historical documents.

For the Free Eagle graph, it seems you just copied the Lion Hawk's diagram and removed some Lion move arrows. To clarify, the Free Eagle's "diagonal moves of the Lion" means it can move as a Ferz (one square diagonally) up to twice per turn, but otherwise has all the Lion move options that this implies. Oh, and don't forget the orthogonal and diagonal slides, which are always present for the Free Eagle.

If you need an easy reference for this move you can click on the Free Eagle in the Interactive Diagram.

rule to document the set view of tenjiku in jocly

Link quote

Do you like the graph better in that version ?

The Free Eagle graph, at least for the move described on this page, which you use in your Rules document, should look like this:

Correct. I keep the image

The hit-and-run captures are not indicated in this move diagram. Note there is no need to squeeze all possible moves in a single diagram, in a rules explanation. For strongly overlapping moves doing so would result in indecipherable spaghetti. Much better to use as many diagrams as is needed to make each of those clear and easy to understand.

In the Interactive Diagram the move diagrams initially only indicates plain (non-)captures, plus potential hopper mounts and locust victims. The destinations of the latter only appear when you materialize an opponent piece on them by hovering/touching. I think that in the case of static diagrams it would be best to provide a separate diagram for cases where presence of a piece is needed to activate a move to a square elsewhere, and only indicate the squares where this can happen by a special marker symbol in the primary diagram. Or even with a background color, so they can combine with plain moves to the same square.

Of course we could consider including interactive move diagrams in Jocly rule descriptions, similar to those that can be summoned in the Interactive Diagram.