How about a game of Japanese Chess, i.e. Shogi? Now playing Shogi4 — Page 73

Perhaps so.  I do not mind getting things straightened out and then continuing, but generally I do not think it is wise to take back a move after another has been made, and definitely should not be done after two others have been made.  So perhaps starting over is in our best interest.

Alright, let's start over.

My first move is L-14kl

Hopefully we don't botch this game as well, or we'll have to report it in the b*tching thread.

P8yz-9xy

P13vw-12wx

Now I've read the instructions to this game a thousand times.  Believe it or not, I obtained the rules when they were extremely obscure, and because I uploaded them all over the place they are now much more widely known.  But I cannot for the life of me gain a clear grasp on the rules for automatic alliances.  Can anyone clarify for me, if either of you understand them better?

From what I understand, an alliance is automatically created in the following scenarios:

1. Player 1 threatens Player 3. Player 2 then also threatens Player 3 elsewhere so that no matter which front he defends he will suffer material loss (i.e. the total value of his pieces will decrease. The relative values are simple and I'll assume you already know them--they're on Wikipedia if you don't). Player 1 and Player 2 are now in an automatic alliance, because they forced material loss on Player 3, who was unable to defend himself on both fronts.

2. Player 1 moves so that one of Player 2's pieces is now threatening Player 3 with material loss. Player 1 has now just allowed Player 2 a positive gain. Previously, Player 3 was under no threat from Player 2's piece, however, a threat was created when Player 1 moved his piece out of the way. That action can be considered equivalent to an attack (but using another player's piece), hence the automatic alliance. So, to reiterate, Player 1 moves so that Player 2 is now threatening Player 3, though this was not the case before Player 1's move. Player 1 has just created a new threat for Player 3 by allowing Player 2 to obtain material gain.

Now, there is an exception. If Player 1 attacks Player 2, and Player 2 makes a defensive move that results in Player 1 threatening Player 3 with material loss (such as a check), Players 1 and 2 are not in an alliance, because Player 2 was defending himself from Player 1 and would have suffered a loss if he hadn't moved defensively.

Alternatively, if Player 1 attacks Player 2, and Player 2 responds by checking Player 1 (or threatening other material loss), after which Player 3 threatens another of Player 1's pieces, Players 2 and 3 are not in alliance because the initial check was a defensive move made to prevent material loss.

Hopefully that helps, but if not, I can clarify further.

Thanks.  I probably need some specific examples to see these theoretical situations in practice to understand them completely.

If you, Post Praetorian, are interested in sticking around for a while, there are other multiplayer versions we could try out:

http://www.chessvariants.org/index/listcomments.php?itemid=HexShogi91-3

This is a 3-player game on a hex board as well, but in general it is simpler.  The pieces move exactly as a hexagonal counterpart to the square board, for instance, instead of modified version.  There are no rules for alliances, and if you read the description in the link, the author believes the nature of shogi does pretty well to counter the petty diplomacy problem as it is without special rules.  What I like most about it are the victory/defeat conditions: a player must have all three kings to win, and does not lose if his king has been captured.  A captured king must be dropped immediately, so a player can try to get a king back.  These simpler rules could make for an interesting game and do surprisingly well to overcome the problems inherent to 3 player games.  I am certainly more interested in the game we are playing, as I've wanted to play it for 18 years to see its complex rules in action, but this other game seems worth a try as well.

Also, I hope I could get enough players for 4-player Yonin Shogi, if you're ever interested. :)

Bx4mn+

Let's try to stir the pot a bit.

And I'm glad to hear you are interested in all those games.  Ric had mentioned Nimmar before, and it looks pretty cool.  I'd love to try it out.  I don't even mind playing simultaneous games of a different category.  For instance, there is a chess thread lying around here somewhere, and your son created a Nimmar thread as well.  I started a chess variant thread, too, so theoretically we could run games simultaneously in different threads, though I personally would only choose to play two at a time.

R-14qr

How you feeling, Ric?  Better start to this game?

Perhaps you could put together a spreadsheet for Nimmar when the time comes :)  Gotta reread those rules.

Yes, I'm feeling far less confused this time round. :)

I'd be happy to mock up a Nimmar spreadsheet sometime. I can't imagine it'll take too long.

P5vw-5tu

It took very little for your Bishop to see the light.  I showed him that our ideology is clearly better and he turned after only four waterboarding sessions.

Probably can't move again tonight, but feel free to play your two turns.  See you both tomorrow :)

Wait, someone else has joined in?  Why wasn't I notified?

P13pq-12qr

check...

Rx13no

The commoners, those trodden under foot, are usually the first to join the resistance, Ric.  Now that I've taken this impressionable young man, I can make him a warrior for the zealots of Red!

And yes, Praetorian, I saw the propaganda video with my bishop assuring everyone that he was being treated well while two armed and masked men flanked either side of him.  The only way you could have gotten to him was by "feeding" him powerful drugs!  I will redeem him and welcome him back to the true fold!

B-12st

I assume promotion for that sickly bird that just landed in our midst? The miserable thing was so hungry I hear it was eager to join my forces when it saw the stuff we feed ours.

(When I think of rooks, this is what comes to mind rather than a silly castle:

The little guy in the picture must be the person who decided to turn rooks into castles instead...)

Yes, I meant to promote.  That was the main goal of my move, thanks.  I need to get some sleep.  I've been up for about 30 hours and need to get some sleep