Enter Your Reply

Mats: 'I don't understand why you haven't purchased this wonderful software. It's only $20.'

I guess the main point is that I aready have my own programs, which I
consider better, and for which I don't have to pay anything. That does not
only pertain to playing strength, but also to the things it can do. E.g.
automated self play. I suppose there is a reason why you only played 4
games with Zillions to play-test the Guanaca, and turn to me to play a few
thousand, in stead of having Zillions do that?

Another issue with Zillions is that it does not support a standard
interface for playing external opponents. I know there is an adapter that
allows WinBoard Chess engines to play in the Zillions GUI. But can the WB
engine play againt the native Zillions AI, in that case? Can two native
Zillions AIs (such as one of your hand-tuned versions against the standard
one) even be played against each other, to optimize the tuning? Does the
WinBoard-to-Zillions adapter work for any variant besides normal Chess?

In short, based on the information I have, WinBoard + Fairy-Max are far
superior to Zillions, and they are free. That Fairy-Max has limitations in
the piece types that can be programmed into it through its .ini file could
be a problem for non-programmer users that are limited to altering the
piece definitions in that .ini file. But it isn't to me: if I would be
really interested in a particular piece falling outside the usual parameter
range, I would simply add a few lines in the C code of Fairy-Max to make it
support such pieces (or special winning conditions). This is what I did to
make a Xiangqi version of Fairy-Max (MaxQi), or for implementing the
Shatranj baring rule (Shamax).

Did you ever download Fairy-Max? That is only $0...

On the main topic: Some 'half-time standings': 2 Alpaca + Pawn are
leading 65% over 2 Guanaco. (Which is more than I would have expected;
usually deleting a Pawn on 8x8 only swings the result by 15-18%). 2 Knights
are leading 55% over 3 Alpacas.