Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Thank you for this proposal but what I wish to do on this page which presents a game of mine is more than inserting a word or two. I wish to harmonize it as with my other games, inserting references, illustrations, etc.
So please, put me as the first author if this can solve the editorial problem, I don't think that H.G. will oppose. I will not remove H.G.'s personal addition on this page (e.g. the Interactive Diagram).
Thank you
📝H. G. Muller wrote on Mon, Jun 26, 2023 08:24 PM UTC in reply to Jean-Louis Cazaux from Sun Jun 25 09:14 PM:Well, obviously I have no moral rights to denying you presenting your own variants; I only created the page because this appeared to be your best and most popular variant (e.g. on Jocly), and at the time there was no page for this at all.
But it breaks my heart, because 'harmonizing' sounds like you want to ruin it by inserting move diagrams, and perhaps use duplicat diagrams of the initial position (one static and one interactive). At least, that is how your other recent articles look.
I'm not sure that inserting move diagrams will be ruining anything, but no I won't do it. Your Int. Diag. does the job. I want to add links to my books talking about Metamachy, to the new ZoG page (thanks to the editor who published it), to other sites which talk about Metamachy.
I am grateful that you created this page. It was a moment of my life when I had lost the habit of coming here.
So please, put me as the first author if this can solve the editorial problem
If the second author cannot edit a page, that needs to be fixed. I'll look into it.
UPDATE: This is now fixed. You can now edit a page as the second author.
@HG: I don't understand the value given to the King by the ID. How to interpret it? What bothers me is that the value of the Prince which moves like a King plus the Pawn's double step, has less value.
I got it: that's the rule of the King's jump that increases the value of the King. Impressive.
For example on a 8x8:
Man (K=WF): 342
King (as in chess, KisO2): 342 (strange, no increase)
Prince (KfmnnD): 347 (why a double n?)
Prince (KfmnD): 347
King (as in Metamachy, w/jump KimAimDimN) 458
📝H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Jul 29, 2023 02:33 PM UTC in reply to Jean-Louis Cazaux from 12:26 PM:Umm, this is unintended. The ID determines the typical mobility of a piece by generating moves for it on all empty squares of a 25% populated board, for a large number of randomly generated positions. But apparently I put the piece there in a virgin state, so that initial moves are also counted. This is of course not the correct thing to do; initial moves should contribute almost nothing to piece value. Just some positional advantage, which could also be achieved by starting the piece in a different location of the initial setup. I will correct this.
For castling it has no effect, because even if the King is virgin, there usually would be no castling partner available, and even if there is, the castling would usually be blocked by other pieces.
Prince (KfmnnD): 347 (why a double n?)
This is a trick for making the lame move (which in itself could be simply nD) create en-passant rights (so that moves with e mode can capture it on the square it passed through).
8 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Drat, I guess member submitted pages don't work with the second author field like I assumed. I might be able to adjust that in the code, but we'd need to talk about whether that could be problematic (for starters, what happens if two authors try to edit at nearly the same time).
In the meantime, I (or H.G.) could swap you and H.G. as first and second authors, if he's fine with that. Or you could send him the requested changes like he suggested earlier.