Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Ahem.

The contest says the rules will be selected by poll, but I've been unable
to find instructions as to how the poll will be conducted.

Vote for one, vote for two, rank all in order of your preference, what?

Thanks for any clarification.

Robert:

I sent email to each entrant on 2 January outlining how polls are
conducted.  (Only entrants are eligible to vote.)  Each month I will send
email to my list of all entrants with the current month's polling
instructions.  The following is excerpted from that email.

---begin excerpt---
To vote:  Send me an email ([email protected]) voting for as many or
as few nominees below as you wish, in order of preference.  I will use
Single Transferable Vote counting to establish the winner.

While you have all of January to vote, if I hear from all nine entrants
sooner I will announce the result ASAP.
---end excerpt---

Also included was the text from the webpage recounting the nominees.

If you or anyone else was an entrant as of January 1, and did not get this
email from me, please confirm your email address to me.  Anyone who has
entered for the first time in January, as well as prior entrants, should
hear from me around February 2.

Glenn

Ok, here is some lobbying:

In a chess variant designed by committee, I think it'd be a good idea to
incorporate some aspects of politics into the game.  Rule suggestion #4
gives the pieces part of a politician's personality:  the unwillingness to
fight without the assurance of support.

Some have raised the concern that this will slow down the game too much. 
If this is so, we can compensate by making the pieces more powerful.

Go for #4!

I have votes from seven of the nine entrants as of January 1.  The four new
people will be eligible to vote in the remaining 6 polls beginning in a
couple of days.

The new rules section will re-open for suggestions on Saturday, after the
deadline for the current voting passes.  The list for Pawns will close for
good at that time, as the February poll will pick the Pawn.

Also, two more suggestions have been posted.

The January poll is done.  Email to our 14 entrants for the February poll
will go out later tonight.  Suggestions are open for everything except the
Pawn (which is being voted on now).

Zillions programmers have six months or so to figure out how to program
the Cube.  If it can be done.  :)

Comments on the field of Pawns:

Eaglet -- Straightforward yet novel.
Novice -- Curious.  Is it stronger or weaker than a standard pawn?
Left/Right Pawns -- Possibly tough to track.
Rapid Pawn -- Another straightforward and appealing entry.
Checkers -- These could be quite powerful.  Is this hybrid good?
Militia -- Rifle-pieces always introduce questions.
Nickel -- Imaginative.
Piece of Eight -- Alone, not so hot...if the Tower of Hanoi wins, :)

Takeover knights: Capture by means other than replacement makes for a
powerful piece, esp. when combined with the possibility of making double
captures (one by replacement, one by overtaking).  This is a bit TOO big
of a gun for my taste, but your mileage may vary.

Footsore camel: Interesting piece.  My value guestimate is somewhere
between bishop and rook, with similar trends throughout the game because
it is a rider of a sort.  It develops about as easily as the bishop,
though perhaps not as flexibly.  I think it could make for some
interesting opening play.

Teleporter: I think this piece is broken.  Since it cannot be captured,
and it can teleport its own king, I can see a large class of drawn
endgames where the weak side's king can perpetually evade check through
teleportation.

Lazy camel: I think it's about knight-valued, overall, and a neat way of
getting the Omega Chess wizard onto an 8x8 board.  It seems mostly
defensive though -- after the bishop-pawn moves, it can make a diagonal
step and attack the opposing side's center, but this seems an opening
move more likely to be threatened than actually carried out.  Perhaps it
would be a good fit for Shatranj with Different Armies.

Mule: Simple, straightforward.  The knight-move makes it want to be used
for a shock troop on the 8x8 board, but its value is more rookish, and it
does have some blanketing power for the endgame.  If it gets voted in,
I'd want some other weak piece to take the knight's place, though.

NnL: By the endgame, this would be almost as powerful as the full-fledged
wildebeest, but in the opening, scarcely more valuable than the knight. 
It constantly tempts the player to trade it off, although it wants to stay
in the game, because it's always getting more valuable.  Another
interesting entry. I think LnN would be an even more interesting piece,
albeit not on this small a board.  Anyone for Seperate Realms Grand
Chess?

Kamikaze: I think 'bomb' pieces need more limitations than this before
they play well with others.

Terminators: Is draw by isolation possible?  They can knock out the entire
center, leaving only files along the edge...

Samurai: I like this one -- the centaur is ordinarily a bit overpowered
(somewhere between a cardinal and a queen, in my estimation) to play well
in the minor piece role (yet maybe use it instead of knightriders in
tripunch chess...), but by forcing compulsory capture on it, it lays down
the question of what lengths are worth going to in order to preserve it
for the endgame, when it might have more freedom because it would not be
so easily trapped.

That's also how I would interpret the proposal...one of the eight squares
adjacent to a S~pawning Queen would need to be vacant to receive the
created Pawn.

Comments about the Queens (11 days to vote!)

Fiend: It might work on the 12x12 board for which it was designed, but
that long leap for an Immobilizer on 8x8 may have problems.

Killer Immobilizer: This feels like too many rules.

Tower of Hanoi: The objection to this creative piece is its use of sixteen
checkers in addition to the usual pieces.  But the idea has worthwhile
potential anyway.

Queen+Lame Camel: Does Camel Chess need a camel?  If so, this is a
reasonable choice.

Queckers: A multi-moving Queen scares me.  :)

Ancestral Dragon: Knowing what a simple knight relay does, the relay power
of this piece seems over the top.

The S~Pawn~ing Queen: I wish the proposal had not allowed for up to 12
pawns on a side.  That's a lot.

I'm not sure which way to go.  But I'm looking forward to the Bishops
next month, which have some really cool ideas.

Just two days left for the voters to pick a new Queen!  If you want in on
the remaining three polls (Bishops, the second New Rule, and Rooks) then
send in a suggestion for one or more of them.  :)

I am also starting to look at ideas for how to organize Luotuoqi II,
possibly without the limitation of the standard set.  Given the long
history of chess on somewhat bigger boards, here's my first idea:

The game is for a 10 x 10 board.

First ballot selects three 'doubled' pieces (two of each in setup), and
a fourth- through seventh- choice as possible extras.

Second ballot selects three 'single' pieces (one of each in setup), and
a fourth- and fifth choice as possible extras.

Third ballot selects a pawn to be used, including oddities such as
promotion and multiple step.

Fourth ballot selects three extra rules, with a 100-word limit instead of
50 words.

Fifth and final ballot selects a setup.  This would include three to seven
'doubled' pieces, three to five 'single' pieces, a king, and the row
of pawns (which may be staggered on more than one rank, or have holes). 
Assuming a full row of 10 pawns...which is not mandated, although it is
likely...this makes for 20 to 30 pieces per side according to voter
preference.

Your comments are invited.

Selecting a royal piece might be an interesting addition to Luotuoqi II.  I
can think of more than a few ideas.  :)

Handicapping the Bishops...which are a very good lot...

Diagonal Bypasser is not quite as fearsome as it looks; it must move at
least three squares to capture anything.  (Does it capture friendly pieces
as well?)

Roc is sound, and incorporates the Camel's traditional move.  But it is
perhaps more tame than some other choices.

Hopping Bishop is another reasonable colorbound piece, somewhat stronger
than a straight Bishop.

Bishop + Lame Camel has theme going for it, if the voters buy the 'Camel
Chess needs a Camel' theory.

Dualist Monk has a few too many rules for my taste.

Chaplain has not quite so many rules.  Since our Pawns (the Eaglets) do
not promote, having a 'Bishop' that can is of interest, especially if a
relatively strong 'Rook' joins the Tower of Hanoi and the Mule.

Sliding Bishop is an elegant way to let the Bishops change colors, if that
is desired.

Crooked Picket is a zigzag piece, which I confess to not liking much on a
personal level.  Yet it could fit this game.

I lean toward Chaplain, Diagonal Bypasser, Sliding Bishop, Roc, B + Lame
Camel, but am listening to persuasion attempts.