Ratings & Comments
296. Corporal. The Corporal is the most basic "improved Pawn," moving for the most part like an orthodox Pawn except that its forward diagonal move does not require capture. (fFfmWifmnD)
I don't see this piece much, but I think the intent is that it will appear as an auxiliary to conventional Pawns.
The model is utilitarian, simple, and certaintly no less stable than an orthodox Pawn. (I based its look off the Musketeer icon for the piece.)
I found another fairy piece called fairy in a message sent on 22/11/2020 by grey6436, AKA definitely not guhbuh#8296. https://discord.com/channels/300132117516648449/300133704750071808/779942632302444545
The PTA shows all images there are in the Alfaerie PNG set. It has a number of pre-defined pieces, which then also define a move, and could have names different from the image name. But there exist Alfaerie images which are not associated with any particular move. Such as fortress, spider, diplomat, ninja, bear, tiger. Having no generally accepted use, these are not pre-defined, and automatically added to the table. Without move, and using the image name as piece name. It would be hard to give it any other name, as the image filename is the only thing the script can 'see'; it cannot look at or interpret the actual image. But in Alfaerie the image name is usually descriptive of the image, in case there is no move to describe.
The issue here is very much the same as with warmachinewazir. This also was an image name, in this case descriptive of the move. (or of the image, as in such cases Alfaerie images are move describing themselves.) These are not English words, and not really suitable as names.
The name commonly used to refer to a Commoner when one wants to stress it moves as K is "Non-royal King".
You did not get the point. Does the preset say 'check' when you check with any other piece than an Advancer? I think it doesn't. So then this has nothing to do with the piece being an Advancer.
By default the preset would apply the checking rule, so moves that leave your royal exposed will be refused. To switch that off (for variants where King capture is a goal) you would have to add an extra line on GAME code to the Pre-Game section. (As the Interactive Diagram does not distinguish thuse cases, but simply allows you to play on in checkmated positions.) The preset enforces the rules. It does not generate conversation during the game.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
When I see an inverted King, that's the piece I think of.
Well, I was not familiar with Anti-King Chess, as most people here probably are. But of course I don't want to confuse some people here, even though they will be very rare. So I've changed that and now use the 'Duke'. That should solve the problem, shouldn't it?
Can someone suggest an example where the capture matrix is used?
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Can someone suggest an example where the capture matrix is used?
Minjiku Shogi, Makromachy. For Golem Chess I described how it could be done in the Comments. (At that time I had already made an I.D. in the old way, uses a WeirdPromotion custom script.)
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
The Alfaerie 'duke' image is a good King-like symbol. Jean-Louis uses it in his games for Prince, which is a non-royal King that can also make a noncapturing double-step forward. Other authors often use the 'guard' image, even though that was intended for KAD. The 'man' image is not very popular.
Note that image and name can be independently specified in the PTA. You don't have to use the name 'Duke' just because you like hat symbol. Jean-Louis calls it 'Prince', and there are many people who prefer the name 'Archbishop' for the 'cardinal' symbol.
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.
You did not get the point. Does the preset say 'check' when you check with any other piece than an Advancer? I think it doesn't. So then this has nothing to do with the piece being an Advancer.
I dug back into this thread to find the preset he was talking about. He linked to a particular game in which neither Advancer checked the opponent's King. Continuing this game by choosing Annotate and then Move, I played some moves to get a White Flying Dragon to check the Black King, and when I did, it said "check!". After moving the King out of check, I tried to move White's Advancer, but no legal moves are being highlighted on the board for it. However, its legal moves do show up in the Moves field, and when I tried one, it worked. At the top of the Moves field, I see the legal move "A e1-#to; A #to-b1". I think this is not a properly formatted move, and it may be interfering with the ability to recognize the Advancer's legal moves. Also, when I entered it, it did not recognize it as legal, and it gave the error message "#to is not a valid square".
Here are the moves to the position in question so that you can see what's going on.
1. P f2-f5
1... p f9-f6
2. P e2-e4
2... p e9-e7
3. F i1-h3
3... f i10-h8
4. P i2-i3
4... p d9-d8
5. B h1-i2
5... c g10-f7
6. C d1-f3
6... f b10-c8
7. C g1-e3
7... c d10-f8
8. K f1-i1
8... p g9-g7
9. P b2-b3
9... c f8-e5
10. P d2-d4
10... c e5-f8
11. B c1-b2
11... a e10-h7
12. F b1-e2
12... p i9-i8
13. P g2-g5
13... c f7-e8
14. P g5-g6
14... a h7-f9
15. P c2-c4
15... p b9-b6
16. F h3-g2
16... c e8-d7
17. P d4-d5
17... f c8-d6
18. F e2-h3
18... p c9-c7
19. C f3-e6
19... c d7-e6
20. P d5-e6
20... p j9-j8
21. B b2-a3
21... b c10-a8
22. B a3-d6
22... p e7-d6
23. R h1-f1
23... p j8-j7
24. F g2-d3
24... b h10-j8
25. C e3-g1
25... f h8-i6
26. P j2-j3
26... p d8-d7
27. P a2-a5
27... p b6-a5
28. R a1-a5
28... b a8-b9
29. P e6-d7
29... f9-e8;@-d7
30. C g1-a7
30... f i6-h4
31. C a7-d8 // - check! -
31... k f10-f9
Just click on Annotate for Butterfly Chess and paste these in to see the same position.
OK, I see. The betza.txt code actually does say 'check'. Problem was that by searching for 'say check' I did not find that, because there are quotes around the word 'check'.
It appears that it would only ever say 'check!' when the preset is using the accelerated method for testing legality of highlighted moves. This is the default method, because it is faster. But it is not entirely reliable. The reliable method would try out all pseudo-legal moves, and then generate opponent moves in each of the resulting positions, to see if any of those captures the King. All opponent moves will have to be tried to conclude the move is legal (which usually is the case), and on a large variant this can take very long (to the point where GC aborts the GAME-code execution). And in that branch of teh code it would never say 'check!'.
In the accelerated test it would generate the opponent moves not after the move that has to be tested for legality, but before it. (Meaning that it has to do it only once.) If any of those hit the King, the move that was just made apparently delivers check. After a move considered for highlighting it then only retries such an existing checking move, to see if the check was resolved, and all moves that hit squares mutated by the move-to-be-highlighted (which could have been discovered, and now hit the King). That is a huge time saver.
Where it goes wrong is that during this accelerated check test it actually removes the King, and tests whether it was in check by testing whether a move that hits the square it was on is capture capable. This to avoid a slider check is blocked by the King, making the square behind it to be safe to move to. King moves can then be tested for legality simply by testing whether their destination was marked as attacked. But this procedure does not mark squares that are attacked by locust capture. Such as an Advancer does.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
I'm unable to open that link in either Firefox or Discord.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
This isn't showing up well on any browser or OS I've seen it on. On my iPad, I see the arrowed board both above and below the blank 7x8 board with the pieces, and the one above is tiled. On Android and Windows, the tiled board is not appearing at the top, but the pieces are still not appearing on the same board as the arrows.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
I don't know how a generated preset works, but the
checked
subroutine I use in the fairychess include file normally checks for captures by displacement by checking if each enemy piece on the board can move to the King's position. This would not normally work with Ultima pieces, which do not normally capture by displacement, but I have managed to use this subroutine with Ultima without modifying it. First, let's look at the subroutine:The key to working with Ultima is that it sets movetype to CHECK. With this in mind, I have written functions for Ultima pieces like this:
Depending upon the value of movetype, it will call either Black_Withdrawer_MOVE or Black_Withdrawer_CHECK, which I have defined separately and differently. Thanks to setting movetype to CHECK, the checked subroutine will use the *_CHECK functions for Ultima pieces. Instead of going through a normal move, one of these functions will check whether the piece at the first coordinate can capture the piece at the second. For example:
This first makes sure that the piece is not next to a White Immobilizer (designated as I). It then verifies that the two spaces are adjacent. Calculating the direction away from the piece at #to, it checks whether there is an adjacent empty space in that direction. If there is, it returns true.