Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

I haven't read this in detail, and I'll admit I find long(‐ish) lists of pieces in alphabetical order difficult to make sense of (I've long held alphabetical order is horrible for everything other than dictionaries and list numbering) so I'll definitely have missed some things. A couple of cursory reactions though:

The double promotion thing is rare but neat, and having different pieces promote in different ways (even if to the limited extent it is here) likewise. I wonder a little bit about the memorability of some of the promotions, but then part of that will be lack of familiarity with the pieces themselves, and anyways the large Shōgis have it several times worse

Is the Bodyguard's Hia power even possible in the Interactive Diagrams?

Unless H.G. adds it as a Spell (I don't think he has already?) I expect not without effectively doing the same yourself

I admittedly am only about 98% sure I got his intention right on how [the Satrap] moves

I think I'm with the 2%; Gilman gives the Satrap as Steward+Steamer, the latter of which is mDcA (giving his “Wazbaba[…] capturing as a Fearful”), rather than what you seem to have taken to be mFcD which is the Stevedore. What you describe (fmWcD) is a nonroyal version of the Echidna (from Outback Chess), or Pawned Prince (using M&B terms), which lacks an atomic name.

Ofc it's up to you whether you want to keep the name and switch the piece, or keep (assuming you don't deem it too out of place — fwiw it seems fine to me) the piece and (presumably, to avoid confusion — even if with a nigh‐impenetrable source) adjust the name

Will move diagrams be needed, or are the text descriptions enough?

With the large number of unfamiliar pieces, it's probably worth at least putting each piece's image next to its name in the Pieces section; probably the moves themselves are mostly simple enough to get away w/o full diagrammes, especially since the long limited‐range moves would leave some of them arguably a bit unwieldy.

I would tend to suggest, though (as alluded to above), to order the pieces in some way more meaningful than alphabetical order; just grouping counterparts together would do a lot to give the piece list more structure and make it easier to follow imo

Yeah, I kind of have given up already on trying to do an Interactive Diagram with this -- not just for the Bodyguard's Hia power, but also for the Castling, and for all the promotions that happen.

What you say about the ordering of the lists is a good note. I'll work on that, and maybe the whole thing will seem clearer. What are you referring to by its "image," though? The symbol on a diagram, or what the piece itself would look like?

As for the Satrap, I think I'll go ahead and fix the move. (I blame Gilman himself for the confusion; too much cross-referencing without a bottom-line explanation just makes things harder.) This would make it, I think, mWmDcFcA... which, on second thought, would kind of call for a mFmAcWcD somewhere, so I may just dump the Satrap altogether for a Squirrel or something similarly circular. (I'll leave that part as-is until I decide.)

The Satrap is now replaced with the Squirrel; and I've rearranged the pieces on the list, the tables, and even the setup board so that rotary companions are together. I also added a few quick notes explaing some of the new pieces' names. Hopefully that makes things a little easier for you (and folks like you), Bn Em.

I almost went with a Turtle instead of the Squirrel, since the move (Q4AD) fits with the theme better; and I may still go that way even though there are already a lot of new and obscure pieces in this set.

What are you referring to by its "image," though?

I meant the diagram image, so that it's easy to relate the Pieces section to the setup diagram (the listing of pieces helps too, but I always find it harder to deal with as it doesn't have as obvious a visual correspondence)

[mWmDcFcA] would kind of call for a mFmAcWcD somewhere

That was my thought too; if you are thinking sth more squirrel‐like, you could keep the value roughly similar to the Satrap (and retain its divergence) by going e.g. mNcAcD

[Edit: I hadn't seen you'd done the replacement already; Squirrel, or indeed Turtle, are also decent choices]

I've rearranged the pieces on the list, the tables, and even the setup board […] Hopefully that makes things a little easier for you (and folks like you)

It's definitely an improvement (though don't Pawn and Berolina count as a rotary pair too?), though there's no need for it to interfere w/ the setup unless you think it improves it game‐wise. Further improvements might include matching the order of promotees with their predecessors, and (if feasible) analysing the pieces' moves to find a more intuitive order — for all that his prose can be incredibly dense, Gilman's Piece sections are really exemplary in this regard imo

I meant the diagram image, so that it's easy to relate the Pieces section to the setup diagram (the listing of pieces helps too, but I always find it harder to deal with as it doesn't have as obvious a visual correspondence)

   Given that I use Musketeer Board Painter, that may be more easily said than done. Still, I can give it a shot.

Further improvements might include matching the order of promotees with their predecessors...

So basically, where the Hospitaller and Templar are the first promoting pieces on the starter list, the Healer and Crusader would be first on the First Promotions list?

That kinda is what the table is for, actually.

...and (if feasible) analysing the pieces' moves to find a more intuitive order...

Meaning, list the pieces (at least, in the first section) in order from least to most powerful? I think I can manage that.

On another note, do you happen to know of a mFmAcWcD piece? And that mNcAcD sounds like a fun possibility, if it has a mAmDcN to go with it.

That kinda is what the table is for, actually.

Well the two serve slightly different purposes really; the table is useful for quick reference, whereas with the list it'd just be an ordering principle, and imo one that makes sense given the separation into first‐, second‐, and third‐stage pieces

On another note, do you happen to know of a mFmAcWcD piece?

I don't remember seeing it used, nor, therefore, any names for it besides Contrasatrap (whence one might also suggest Berolina Satrap). If we're looking for atomic names, perhaps another Persian rank? Either government, such as the Sasanian Shahrab or Mowbed, or military (cf. Guardian for the Berolina Steward) if you can find one

And that mNcAcD sounds like a fun possibility, if it has a mAmDcN to go with it.

Fwiw it feels to me less in need of a counterpart than the Satrap, perhaps because of the less‐obvious correspondence with the pawn/steward. And like those but not their Berolina counterparts, its noncapture is unbound.

I know I've seen it somewhere, as an explicit second‐perimeter Steward counterpart, but I alas don't remember where or what it was called. It seems to have been beyond Gilman's radar

OK, I'll look at what I can do for re-ordering the lists. I've also decided to go with the Turtle after all rather than the Squirrel, and the Turtle's longer move calls for a reworking of the layout order (and since I have to redo the diagram anyway, I might as well).

As for mFmAcWcD, if I'm having to work that out myself, I think I'd rather go for a Muslim (or pre-Muslim Persian) religious title. The names do tend to go secular one way, ecumenical the other.

Similarly, I'll try to come up with a couple if names for the mNcAcD and mAmDcN (probably animals, most likely an equine or feline for the first and a rodent for the second).

(Since none of these four pieces are for this game, and I've barely started work on the one that they are for, any further discussion of them probably should go on my own page.)

Is the Bodyguard's Hia power even possible in the Interactive Diagrams?

Unless H.G. adds it as a Spell (I don't think he has already?) I expect not without effectively doing the same yourself

Regarding this... my first-blush impression of the brake Spell was that this was what it was for, but on further examination it seems I was mistaken. Hia power would need a variation on brake.

Hia power would need a variation on brake.

Indeed. That means it should not be very difficult to support that too. In fact I don't even know if the brake spell as I implemented it is used in any variant; when I was implementing the spells I was just imagining what spells could be useful. The Hia power strikes me as a bit inconsistent (if you can make one step out of the spell zone, it would be natural that sliders only have to stop one step after first touching it), so I did not think of that. So perhaps I should add a spell slow, which turns riders into leapers while in the spell zone.

Come to think of it, what I now implemented as brake could actually be decomposed as terminating slides as soon as they touch the zone (catch?) and immobilization (freeze). Hia power could then be decomposed as catch + slow. So perhaps I should make the spell mechanism more flexible, allowing arbitrary combination of spells.

Hia Power doesn't affect leapers, but I don't know of any rule regarding how it would affect riders; turning riders into single leapers makes sense. At the very least, slow would turn sliding moves into single steps, and immobilize "ski" moves.

At the very least, slow would turn sliding moves into single steps, and immobilize "ski" moves.

That depends on how you look at it. If you see the ski slide as a degenerate bent rider (e.g. D-then-R), and you would allow a pure D to make its leap even within the Hia zone, it would be logical to allow the D-then-R its first (D) step too. Just like you would allow the Griffon (F-then-R) to make its F move.

Even if it was a lame ski slide, like the Tamerlane picket (nA-then-B), it would be logical to treat it as nA. But it is a matter of taste how that should be treated. I would be inclined to allow it its move, rather than completely immobilizing it.

Yes, a "leaping ski" should be allowed its full move; I'd rule against a "lame ski" being able to move, though. To my mind, at least, a lame leaper is as good as a slider.

It seems that in any case Hia power is described somewhat inconsistently; some sources seem to present it as only having what H.G. has called catch, which for my taste is the nicer rule; not least, a catch‐only hia also diminishes concerns about completely neutering lame leapers.

Of course, the sources Mats lists both disagree with him: Wikipedia has a catch+slow Hia, whereas afaict Cazaux only explicitly lists slow, though it's possible to interpret it as including catch too. Wikipedia's other source (besides this site's link to Mats' page) again only mentions catch explicitly (clarifying with examples), but is ambiguous in both text and example regarding slow

The number of possible spells is overwhelming, as each type can also apply to friends only, enemies only, or both. The spells I implemented now are only those that favor the side of the piece casting it: you only burn enemies, and only protect friends. I suppose I could implement a similar option curse, which then would cast the mentioned spell(s) on pieces of the opposit color.

I wrote about Hiashatar several years ago, so I'm not sure to well remember.

It is a frequent mistake by modern players to think that rules were scrupulously followed by everyone for ancient and traditional games, especially variants like this one. There were no Hiashatar Academy!

I had also met the problem that the different sources are not consistent between themselves. There is this endnote in my book, A World Of Chess: "The rules given here are the best logical composite drawn from a variety of sources, each of which has its own omissions and inconsistencies. It is also likely that there was some variation in how the game was played at different locations. For instance, some reports have the Bodyguard only arresting the moves of the enemy pieces; others have the Bodyguard capturing using his normal move."

I am not sure to understand what you call "slow" and "catch". The "main" rule we gave in A World of Chess" is: "Bodyguard: moves one or two squares diagonally or orthogonally; that is, any direction (but not at an angle like the Knight). However, he is only able to capture by moving one square diagonally. He does not leap, but may only pass through vacant squares. He also has the special power of arresting the move of any piece which passes through his realm of influence – the eight squares surrounding him. Any piece that aims to pass through one of these squares adjacent to the Bodyguard must stop on that square, until some future move. Nevertheless, this special power does not affect the Horses, which can jump in or out of the Bodyguard's peripheral zone freely"

This is kind of "catch" with my understanding. Why you see an explicit "slow" here, I don't know. The attacking piece MUST stop.

The slow I proposed would limit riders that start in the spell zone to a single leap.

Some other ideas for elaborating on the spell concept:

• As it is the (same) spell is cast by one or more piece types, but then affects every other piece type equally. But this could be made type selective with the aid of the captureMatrix: a special symbol (say $) in the position for the (active type, passive type) combination could make the passive type immune for the spell cast by the active type.
• A useful new spell could be drop, meaning pieces in the hand could be dropped in the spell zone.
• A very similar spell would be recall, which would allow pieces on the board to teleport to the spell zone no matter where they are.

Absent any objections or further notes, I think this game is good to go.

I am not sure to understand what you call "slow" and "catch"

slow is anything starting on an affected space being limited to one step; catch is anything trying to move throught the space having to stop (more‐or‐less as if there were enemy pieces stationed in those squares)

This is kind of "catch" with my understanding. Why you see an explicit "slow" here, I don't know.

I may have misinterpreted your use of “on” in “on its 8 surrounding squares, all (allied or ennemy) pieces can only move 1 step only”; to me that reads like ‘from’ rather than through, giving slow. Your A World of Chess description is fairly explicitly catch‐only

It is a frequent mistake by modern players to think that rules were scrupulously followed by everyone for ancient and traditional games

Of course, the rules probably varied; I was mostly pointing it out as Bob's choice of ‘Hia’ power (catch+slow) differs from my preference (catch only) and raised some awkward questions regarding lame pieces

The more I look at the promotions for this game, the more I realize: if there's ever going to be an Interactive Diagram for this page (which I doubt), the only person on the face of the planet who will be able to write it is H. G. Muller.

Not much chance at this point, as I don't understand the promotion rules at all. You have both promotion on capture and promotion in a zone, and for the latter different rules for last rank and other ranks?

Promotion in a zone with choice can be configured through promoChoice, and this offers the possibility to restrict some choices to a smaller number of ranks, forbid them on last rank (usually for deferral), or restrict them to pieces in the holdings. You can cause captured pieces to go into the holdings (without color flip) by holdingsType=1.

Promotions to a fixed type at a certain location can be configured through a morph board for the promoting piece types. There is currently no way to make such a promotion optional, or if it is optional, restrict it to pieces in the holdings. This could be useful enhancements of the Diagram script, though. The same holds for promotion on capture through the captureMatrix.

Not much chance at this point, as I don't understand the promotion rules at all. You have both promotion on capture and promotion in a zone, and for the latter different rules for last rank and other ranks?

You confirmed what I thought about it: never mind the Hia power rules, the promotion rules are too much for a Diagram!

The Pawns and Berolinas promote from the Zones (first to unpromoted pieces, second to first-promotions); Guards only by capture; other unpromoted pieces by either capture or the first zone; and first-promotion only by capturing other promoted pieces. That's a lot for any generic system to try to be able to handle.

The Pawns and Berolinas promote from the Zones (first to unpromoted pieces, second to first-promotions); Guards only by capture; other unpromoted pieces by either capture or the first zone; and first-promotion only by capturing other promoted pieces. That's a lot for any generic system to try to be able to handle.

Well, I see a lot in there that can be handled generically. E.g. that the promotion choice is not always the same, but could depend on the type of the piece that promotes. One way to implement this would be to alter the meaning of the promoChoice parameter when it is used after a piece definition, to apply only to that piece type, and have each piece type then use its own set of choices when the zone rules or an asterisk in the morph or captureMatrix orders a promotion choice.

Or even better, allow the definition of a number of choice sets that are not directly associated with a piece type, e.g. separated by slashes in the promoChoice parameter. Promotion as per maxPromote and promoZone would then use the first of those sets. But promotions ordered by the morph or captureMatrix could explicitly refer to one of the other sets by putting a digit in the element referring to that square or (attacker, victim) combination. So that the choice for a given type can depend on where it promotes in a location-triggered promotion, or on what it captures.

Another way to enhance the capabilities is a better coexistence of chess-like and shogi-like promotions. E.g. your promotion rules for non-Pawns could conveniently be configured by a promoOffset parameter, and proper ordering of the piece definitions. Then we could set maxPromote=0 to suppress any automatic invocation of the promotion procedure, and only rely on promotions to be requested by the morph or captureMatrix. There would be separate symbols in those matrices for indicating promotion per promoOffset and promotion per choice set, and in the first case there could be different symbols for a normal promote/defer choice, or an automatic deferral when the promotion piece is not available in the holdings. (For a choice set this distinction would have been indicated as part of the set, as is already possible in promoChoice. An automatic promotion can already be indicated by putting the piece ID of the promoted type in the matrices.)

I probably could handle all that if I had a way to edit and test it offline. As it is, I think I'll go back to leaving it all to you (if and when you feel inclined to do it, and once the Hia power is figured out).

For my own part, at least I've designed a full set of pieces for the game, and I hope to get them all set up if I can find a willing opponent.

Also, I think I'll dig in and try to clarify the promotion rules.

Well, you can edit and test off-line. It is what I usually do, when creating new Diagrams. The ID works just as well locally as on CVP. Provided you also copied the betza.js (or betzaNew.js) script and the required piece images to your own computer, and let the html page you embed the Diagram in point to those.