Ratings & Comments
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Please review this page.
Also how to enlarge the list of non-English pages which are MS rather than games’ pages?
I added some Alfaerie pieces to this page and to the preset. Since I don't have a custom Alfaerie piece for the Decoy, I used an equesrex. Since I don't have one for the Spy, I used the spider. Like a spider knows what is happening on its web and how to move safely along it, the Spy gets intelligence on what is happening on the board and how to safely move on it. Also, spider starts with the same syllable as spy. But if someone designs some custom piece images for these, I might use them.
Ruby Mine by Stuart Spence, AKA Zulban_tyr
But 960.
Thank you're welcome! For the pieces' image, you can either view the page source or click the underlined here then tap and hold the piece image then open image in new tab.
Note that my implementation is not accurate with the rules written here. Moving a pawn using another piece to a promotion rank does not promote that pawn, instead the pawn gains Rook moves.
This gave me an idea for an army for CwDA.
Bullseye BuddiesI am having concrns that the spy is too powerful. It is a very mobile piece that can very easily avoid capture. So I'm thinking of allowing it to capture on an attacked space, limiting its inability to move to an attacked space to empty spaces. This would give its intelligence a degree of fallibility. With this change, I would increase the attacking ability of the Decoy by not limiting the pieces its knight move can capture, which would let it check the eneemy king. I may try this in a new settings file, since I don't want to change the rules for ongoing games.
Hi HaruN Y,
I can't see what your variants have to do with my idea of the bull's eye, which concern the central squares d4, d5, e4 and e5 and where the pieces are given move possibilities corresponding to those of the queen and knight in combination.
Otherwise, I think the possibility of offering various variants in one diagram is very effective.
Click the button that says "buddies".
Otherwise, I think the possibility of offering various variants in one diagram is very effective.
It is especially effective for 'combinatorial cases'. With 8 armies you would need 64 Diagrams to provide all combinations. The number of buttons required is 4 times smaller, and buttons are again much smaller than Diagrams. I suppose one could even do with 8 buttons here, using the convention that clicking the buttons alternately defines white and black.
Okay, HaruN Y seems to have no problem with such a representation, which seems efficient. But we should be careful not to use this as a yardstick! Because then we can stamp 99 percent or something on new variants and no one will post anymore.
Well, 99% of all variants do not offer a choice between all kinds of different material, and consequently would not need any buttons at all.
Of course, I mean variants that build on each other. They are then obsolete.
I combined my thoughts from last night with what was the alternate description for the Spy I had yet to try out and wrote up a new alternate description of the piece. While writing it, I covered one detail with more precision that should also apply to the current version. A spy cannot capture a piece that could capture it, which for the Pawn means it must avoid moving as one of its own Pawns when capturing one. This was coded incorrectly in this case, and I fixed it in the code of the current games. Fortunately, this bug had not led to any illegal moves.
I don't think incorporating a new idea in another variant necessarily makes the variant that originally presented this idea obsolete. Combining too many independent ideas just gives a messy variant.
The author, Vincenzo Rapisardi, has updated this page.
Thanks again! I finally managed to resolve the issue with the images. I noticed the thing with the push-promotion but I'm totally fine with it. I don't think there is a way to allow the users to choose the promotion piece, and even if there was I don't believe it is that important in this particular case :)
EDIT: I found out that it is possible to choose the promotion piece, but I'm not sure if it is possible to implement this option for a "push-promotion".
Fire Fairies by Madman, AKA madman_madchessdev
While working on my collection for frog/Hannibal/Waffle chess with Gryphon/Manticore and Falcon I am a bit confused where to actually put the Interactive diagrams. I think best, as there is an ai, would be to have a "try it" separate chapter (or "play it" if that is deemed as a better title). The way things are, "initial position" and "pieces" are both good places to put them. Please take a moment to think about this. Fergus, what do you think? Is it doable? The rest, what do you guys think?
While working on my collection for frog/Hannibal/Waffle chess with Gryphon/Manticore and Falcon I am a bit confused where to actually put the Interactive diagrams.
You already have it in the Setup section, which is where they usually go.
I think best, as there is an ai, would be to have a "try it" separate chapter (or "play it" if that is deemed as a better title).
Why?
Because in the setup section the author can talk about the setup. In the pieces section about the piece powers without invoking the interactive diagram which will be saved for the try it section. Of anything the interactive diagram serves both the setup and pieces sections well and it can fit in any of them. But it is more than that by allowing an user to play the game. And currently the setup/pieces section are relegated to explaining what the diagram does.
I see the point. The diagrams' four functions--setup diagram, individual piece movement displays, move pieces around, and play against AI--each naturally fit into different sections. But breaking it apart into those would be worse. So then do you replace a static diagram at the start of the article, or add the new one later? I don't think it matters too much, but saving some space by replacing the setup diagram is nice, and giving the interactive tool near the beginning of the article is more engaging.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.