Ratings & Comments

@ Bn Em:

I edited the intro sections slightly, to the (3) Rules pages (two already published, recently), as I think you requested.

The author, Kevin Pacey, has updated this page.

The author, Kevin Pacey, has updated this page.

With my supply of pieces dwindling, I'll need these. Thanks! :)

And I’m again with suggestions:

Bullet, most recent

Three tricky birds

Stunt-based chessmen

The largest list

I noticed today in the comments section that Smess was being given the description for Take the Brain. So, I made some corrections to make sure that the correct description was given for the name it was paired up with in IndexEntry. In the comments section, the primary name and description should now be used. In queries of the database on the names of games, each description will now show up for the name it goes with. On the What's New page, the name should be the primary name, and the description should be the Whatsnew text if it is available. Otherwise, it will fall back to using the primary description. All of this now works correctly for Smess, All the King's Men, and Take the Brain, though I have not tested other games with multiple names.

298. Chained Bishop, 299. Chained Rook, and 300. Chained Queen. These are related to (and, unconsciously, indirectly inspired by) the Helical Switchback Rhino and Griffin that were suggested to me by fellow CVP contributor Bn Em for Unnecessarily Complicated Chess. Given that today's my birthday and this set leads into #300, I thought it seemed like a fitting moment.

These pieces start by taking one step in the direction 45° from what the name would suggest: orthogonally for the Bishop, and diagonally for the Rook. They then turn 45° toward the intended general direction, step one space, then make another 45° turn the same direction (left or right) as the previous one, and continue making alternating turns of two left and two right (in either order) until reaching their destination.

For example, here's the Chained Bishop (Wafs(afqafz)Wafsafq(afzafq)W):

And the Chained Rook (Fafs(afqafz)Fafsafq(afzafq)F):

The Chained Queen, naturally, combines the two (Kafs(afqafz)Kafsafq(afzafq)K).

The marking for "Chained" was tossed together as a casual experiment, and I was surprised at how well it worked, at least to my eye.

I can imagine how "Chaining" could be applied to other pieces as well -- not just compounds like Chancellor and Archbishop, but also bent sliders like Rhino/Manticore and Eagle/Griffin, or even leaping sliders like Ostrich and Osprey or Tiger and Striped Dragon. (I'm not so sure how well a Chained Nightrider would work, though.)

Because the Ivorytower pieces looked a little small on the board, I reduced the size of the board from 83x83 squares to 73x73 squares. The original board had 83x73 squares to give it a more square shape with a 7x8 layout, but the 73 pixel width works better for the Ivorytower pieces, because they can now fully cover up the oval on some spaces that names the piece starting from that position. I also tried 60x60 spaces, as that is the size used in Storm the Ivory Tower, but the Blue Brain was covering up too much of the forward arrow on its space. So I reverted to 73x73.

While the Ivorytower pieces do look better, they are still rough around the edges. and I think they would look better as SVG pieces.

Ah, that link works quite nicely.

So the basic Fairy in this case is basically WS, with that special property of making enemy pieces that target it switch sides for one turn. The swapping property of the more advanced versions are a bit more interesting, though if I'm doing a Fairy in Fairy Chess I'd want it to be more like what I proposed. (Not that the Discord version is a bad idea, of course; I may come up with something for the Fairy++ on the chart.)

Apologies, I'd meant to publish the Accelerated games alongside the regular(?) ones but apparently neglected to actually hit the update button.

That said, the links in particular are a welcome addition which arguably the other pages would benefit from too if you're not too averse to adding them

Random Capablanca Chess (In the page "variants playable against the diagram ai", the applet doesn't work)

Far Range by EpicAntonio08

How about this? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/300133704750071808/779942631785758731/unknown.png?ex=664054ae&is=663f032e&hm=c1d9a777fff6bd71d82b7ce1daeddea276cfff56edda1a9868bfdfc6e13c21a7&

The author, Kevin Pacey, has updated this page.

I don't know how to say that the source piece cannot hop to move, to capture, or capture said type. Meaning both ? and $.

@ Bn Em:

I (again) edited the intro section, and think you may like this Rules Page better now for your review.

P.S,: edited it once more, at 1:40 A.M.

297. Paratrooper. There actually have been a few definitions for Paratrooper before, the most notable on this site being in Pawntrooper Chess, Invasion, and (on a rhombus board) Diamond Chess 306. All of those are quite legitimate takes, but I'm not sure that even the first two could be shown on an Interactive Diagram.

The version of Paratrooper that I propose can, by default, move two spaces in any orthogonal or diagonal direction (K2). It can also, if it's in the player's starting area, move without capture any distance along those lines, leaping over any number of pieces in the way (K2(paf)mQ).

(I just finished making this entry this morning, and my brain's been too tired to make a move diagram. I'll see if I can't rectify that tomorrow, and replace this paragraph with it.)

On an Interactive Diagram, the limitation for the longer move would be done with the morph function.

I wouldn't worry too much about the supports breaking on this; they're 3.25mm in diameter, and there are eight of them.