How about a game of Japanese Chess, i.e. Shogi? Now playing Shogi4 — Page 40

Glad to hear it. Phx21

You forgot to promote to Goose.

RSx22+B

So I did, thank you.

I'm getting worried. It's only a matter of time before you take my few remaining pieces, and then it's an easy checkmate for you.

I can't think of any good offenses with what I have, so I'll play the waiting game for a bit.

Gs-23

B*21.  It will be difficult to force a win with those blocked pieces.  I'll wear you down eventually.

Truthfully, I didn't expect to win this at all.  I'm surprised.  Of course, it's not over till it's over, so you might still pull a win out of this. :)

G*25

Bx17+RS

Kx28

Not much else I can do, really.

SC*30 mate

That was a good game.  I am really pleased with how challenging it was.  I hope you enjoyed it.  Please whene you can, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the nature of the game, any feedback you have on the starting position, any weaknesses in any aspect of this game.  I really enjoyed your playing, and you had some very nice combinations!  Well played, sir :)

I should have seen that coming, but I guess it was hard to avoid. I enjoyed the game, and I'm pleased that it lasted longer than our first game of regular Shogi. I did well early on, but you pulled ahead and ended up with about twice as many pieces as I had, which gave you a distinct advantage. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to make a comeback, but I think I managed to hold out fairly well.

darth_ender said:

So I am curious about your thoughts.  What would you suggest changing for once this game is done?  I had suggested a positional change, one I'm still interested in.  But I am not certain how well I like the cannons.  They seem a bit too powerful for a game like this.  What's more, they are not truly native to Japanese Chess.  They come from Chinese Chess (gold cannon) and Korean Chess (silver cannon), and were adopted by a Westerner and given their present names for Cannon Shogi.  But there is no actual Japanese heritage for them, so I've always felt a bit like a cheater for including them.  On the other hand, they make the game exciting and faster paced, in what otherwise might take ages to complete.  The silver cannon in particular is especially effective on a one dimensional board, and when a game can get so easily cluttered, it's nice to have a mobile piece.  So I'm not sure.

Perhaps, rather than having a silver/gold cannon, you could use a silver cannon as the promoted value of another piece; perhaps a rook, which you could add to the board. That way you're only half cheating. ;) Of course, a rook would have the same moves as a reverse chariot on this board. Hmmm.... I guess I can't think of a suitable demoted value that isn't already in use.

OK, I thought about it for a bit, and I think they're a central part of the game as it's set up now, so leave them in. I don't think there's a problem with adding pieces to Shogi, which already has so many. It still has the Shogi feel to it, so I wouldn't worry about cheating by using a couple pieces not native to Shogi and variants.

I also think the first four pieces could use some more rearrangement.  When we started this game, I couldn't see a way to initiate a trade without coming out behind.  You did a good job starting the trades and getting our armies to clash, but it took some doing.  With enough study, it would probably be too easy to identify the best opening moves to make.  I want this game to be more complex than that.  Now that we're in the thick of it, I think the number of options has increased and thus made it more interesting and complex.  But the opening is too narrow.  I think it would be better to include more long-range pieces towards the front (especially the somewhat offensively useless lance/reverse chariot, which is always stuck behind its own pieces unless captured and dropped by the enemy), while tucking a couple of steppers or leapers (perhaps the silver, knight, or goose) closer to the back to act as defense.

I agree. Here is my proposal for the board layout (from front to back):

(centre square)

Pawn/Go-Between

(space)

(space)

Lance/Reverse Chariot

Knight/Heavenly Horse

Gold General/Silver General (note the G as the demoted value)

Goose/Phoenix

(space)

(space)

Silver Cannon/Gold Cannon

(space)

(space)

Ramshead Soldier/Bishop

King

This puts the board at 29 squares. Only the silver cannon and the gold general cannot move on the first turn. The pawns will get taken early in the game (assuming the pawn victim isn't moved, it can be captured with two pawn, knight, or goose moves). This will allow for it to be dropped in a more desirable location and also serves to protect pieces from each other's lances for a couple turns. The knights and geese won't get in each other's way and the gold general can move out as soon as either the lance or knight is moved, and backwards as soon as the goose is moved. The silver cannon can't move until a few turns into the game, but I don't think that is much of a problem.

Hopefully there aren't any major flaws that I didn't spot, but please tweak it a bit if you don't think it quite works.

I'm not entirely sure I want to shrink the board anymore.  Though it's rough for some of my pieces stuck way at my end, it's also good that the pieces in play have plenty of room to maneuver.

I like having the board long too. I did take one square away, but that isn't much. If we want a similar set-up and more squares, we can add two squares, which would put us at 31. Either way, it's just a one square difference. The disadvantage of adding two squares is that both the knight and the goose end up on the centre square. With 29 squares they don't meet until they get to the square the lance is on. The advantages of having 31 squares with my proposed set-up might outweigh the disadvantages though.

Anyway, these are my thoughts.

 And those were mine. ;)

We haven't tried the game with a lion in it. I suggest that if we do that, it would go in the square directly in front of the ramshead soldier. The demoted side would be a Kirin, which would be able to jump two squares forward and two squares backward. The lion would be limited to the igui move, or two squares either forward or backwards, capturing twice. In other words, it would be able to move twice with one square per move. Jumping over a piece to the square just beyond it would count as two moves.

That's pretty much what I suggested earlier, except that I would allow the igui move and have a kirin as the demoted value of the lion, rather than a silver general.

I do think the lion should be as limited as I described, because I really don't think it should be far more powerful than other pieces since the game tends to revolve around it too much in that case. It would still be one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, piece on the board, but it wouldn't take over the game.

Excellent thoughts.  I will take a better look when I get home.  I really appreciate your thoughts and your perception.  I probably won't post again till I get home, but I really appreciate the feedback.  Great thoughts!

I had a long post typed up, and the website pooped out and lost my post. I will probably just retype it in the morning.

Aw, that sucks. I hate it when that happens... :(

At any rate, I'm looking forward to your ideas/criticisms. I may not be able to reply during the day, though, because I'm working tomorrow.

Alright, take 2.  And don't worry about not being able tio reply till evening because I will likely be the same way.  I tend to be longwinded, but I can probably retype my last post in a shortened version.

First, we should change the gold general to a copper general.  Since there is no analogue to horizontal movement, and since the copper general is supposed to be inferior to the silver general anyway, if we simply change the name to copper general, it will retain the same move, yet be the obvious lower ranking version.

Second, the silver cannon is clearly more powerful than the gold cannon.  The gold cannon comes from Chinese chess, the silver from Korean chess.  On a 2D board, the gold cannon is clearly superior.  But on a 1D board with so many pieces, the silver cannon is obviously the better of the two.  In fact, it was so powerful that I almost would prefer to use the gold cannon instead, just to keep it closer in value to the other pieces.  But as you pointed out, if we only keep one cannon, what should we put on the other side?

Third, I am not sure a full-power lion would be as overwhelmingly powerful on a 1D as on a 2D.  But I do have my concerns, and I actually do lean more towards the weaker lion.  I'd like to perhaps try both the weaker and stronger version and see which is better.  In any case, I think the idea of using the kirin as the weaker value is a terrific idea.

I still need to take a better look at the setup, but I think you've got some good ideas.  Give me a bit.  I'm pretty busy today as well, so I'll get to it when I can.

I agree about the copper general, so I'll make that change to my board. And I have a pretty busy weekend, so I'll be able to give you as much time as you need without getting impatient. ;)

Alright, it's been a few days and I apologize.  I've been thinking about the board a great deal and about the opening setup.  I'm still not sure about the cannon.  The more I think about it, the stupider the gold cannon is in this game.  In a 2D game, the ability to move like a rook allows it to be repositioned in a useful spot.  Here, because jumping is entirely reliant on making a capture, and because all pieces need to jump to be effective, the gold cannon is only effective when it has something to capture.  The ability to simply move when there is no piece to capture is useful only when evading capture itself.........

What am I saying?  This could be perfect!  Why am I so naive?  If one wises his cannon to serve as a defensive piece, he should do his best to keep the gold face up.  If he wishes to use it offensively, he should use the silver face.  the gold can remain close to the king while dodging enemy attacks, probably in conjunction with another defensive piece (and I'll show you my proposed setup and ask for your feedback shortly).  So I guess we can keep both cannons, and as you said, have the gold be the weaker face.

Okay then.  I looked carefully at your setup and I liked many of your ideas.  However, I've toyed with it quite a bit and I want to see what you think.

-
-
-
-
-
P
-
Kn
L
N
Gs
-
RS
GC
-
-
C
K

Let me explain a few things I have here.  First, I feel it's important to have a decent amount of space between armies to allow players some space to adjust the positions of their armies.  Second, I've moved the kirin/lion up front.  This allows it to get involved quickly, but it also must be guarded carefully, as it's a very weak piece as a kirin, yet very valuable as a lion, so you don't want someone catching it kirin-side-up, ready to drop it as a lion.  I've kept the lance near the front where it can get involved.  In actuality, in a game like this the lance is a very weak piece, but towards the front in might get to see more action.  Third, I decided to make the copper/silver general more defensive as it usually is in shogi games anyway.  And in conjunction with the cannon piece, together their defense value is improved, particularly if a player wishes to move the C/S up one.  But again, this position allows for two different defensive options off the bat.  And since the silver cannon is so powerful, keeping it towards the back also prevents it from getting into the fray too soon so the game doesn't revolve entirely around it.  The ramshead soldier has a lot of potential, but is also restricted in its mobility, so moving it up a bit gives it more opportunities.  Most pieces can move on the first move, and there are enough short range pieces up front to give variation to the openings.  I know it's different from what you had, but I feel it might work best like this.  How do you feel?  Any concerns?  Wanna play a game with this setup?

Just understand, I am much busier lately, so I'm not sure how fast another game will go.

Don't worry about not posting as I didn't expect you to; it being a long-weekend (at least where I am).

Allow me to reiterate why I had the front pieces set up the way I did (L,N,C,Gs, from front to back). The set-up was designed so that the knight and goose wouldn't get in each other's way until they got to the other side of the board. The lance was in front so that it could defend pieces in front once the pawn was further down the board or captured. The gold general (or copper general as per your suggestion) was able to move forward as soon as either the knight or the lance moved and backward as soon as the goose moved. This way the pieces wouldn't trap each other as they moved out onto the board.

I like a lot of what you changed, including moving the kirin to the front, the copper general to the back, and having the gold cannon as the demoted value of the cannons, but I think the order of the front four pieces could be improved (no offense, just offering constructive criticism :P). With your current set-up, the kirin is stuck until the pawn moves and the lance is stuck until the kirin moves. Also, because the knight is only one square in front of the goose, they both land on the same square for their first move, so when one moves, the other cannot move until the first is moved again.

My suggestion is that the order of the front pieces is changed to this:

P
-
N
Kn
L
Gs

This allows the kirin to move out right away, as it can now jump over the pawn. The knight also jumps over the pawn and lands on a different square than the goose. The lance is still not useful for a while, but I don't think that is much of a problem. To demonstrate how much of the board the pieces will be able to cover, I'll make a diagram with the initial of the three jumping pieces on each square they can reach with their demoted value. The bottom of the diagram is the starting positions of the pieces and it extends to the position of the goose on the opposite side. I will use italicized letters for white's pieces and emboldened letters for black's so that I can show both sides. Below it, I will diagram the same thing with your set-up, just so we can see the strengths and weaknesses of both (not so that you can see how bad yours is or anything ;)). Also note that the dash only indicates a square that none of these three pieces can move to, not necessarily an empty square.

My set-up:

Gs/Kn/Gs
N
Kn/Kn
N
Kn/Gs/Kn/N/Gs
-
Kn/N/Kn
N
Kn/Gs/Kn/Gs
N
Kn/N/Kn
-
Kn/Gs/Kn/N/Gs
N
Kn/Kn
N
Gs/Kn/Gs

Your set-up:

Gs/N/Gs
N/Kn
-
Kn*/Kn/N
N/Gs/Gs
Kn/Kn
N
Kn/N/Kn
Gs/Gs
Kn/N/Kn
N
Kn*/Kn
N/Gs/Gs
Kn/Kn/N
-
N/Kn
Gs/N/Gs

*The kirin cannot move to this square until the pawn has been moved.

I must say I'm glad I made that diagram because I can now spot flaws with my own set-up. Your arrangement results in limited movement for the first few turns, but covers more squares than mine does. With mine, all three jumping pieces meet up on the square in front of the opposing knight which allows for a the pieces to back each other up, but also results in less coverage. You'll notice that each knight has two safe squares in the first diagram, while it only has one in the second. Additionally, pawns are protected until they move (or a piece promotes) in the first diagram. You can study them for a bit and figure out which one is more flawed, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on which flaw you think is easier to live with: limited early moves or less coverage.

I'll suggest another set-up in case I can convince you to go with my suggestion to move the pawn forward:

P
-
-
Kn
N
L
Gs

I would suggest a 31 square board for this set-up to allow a bit of space between the pawns. This arrangement still prevents the goose and knight from getting in each other's way and the kirin does not have to wait for the pawn to move. The knight and kirin land on the same square for their first move, unfortunately, but I don't think this is a big deal. The move diagram for the jumping pieces with this set-up looks like this:

Gs/Gs
Kn
N/N
Kn/Kn
Gs/Gs
Kn/N/Kn/N

Kn/Kn
N/Gs/N/Gs
Kn/Kn

Kn/N/Kn/N
Gs/Gs
Kn/Kn
N/N
Kn
Gs/Gs

This only leaves three squares not reachable by these pieces and the knight doesn't get in the way of the goose until the centre square. However, you may be able to see a big flaw with this one...pretty much only one of these pieces can land on each square until they start getting promoted. There are only 3 exceptions each way in this section of the board, so that doesn't leave much room for them protecting each other. It is also really conducive to trades which can be kind of boring. Of course the pawn and lance will be able to backup these pieces, but they don't usually work as well for that as jumping pieces do.

Maybe you can find a solution to these flaws, or maybe we'll just have to go with one, but either way, I'm looking forward to your thoughts. I'm sorry I didn't come to you with my conclusions but instead made you follow my thought process in a painful fashion, but I began typing the post thinking I had the solution, only to realize I didn't when I made the diagrams. It does help both of us see what will and won't work though, so maybe you'll be able to make something out of it. :P

I will analyze this more later.  For now I will say that I am not terribly concerned about piece interaction later down the board.  The board is so crowded that such pieces will be traded and dropped long before they get to the end of the board.  I am most interested in friendly interactions in the beginning of the game, before exchanges have occurred.  I probably like your first suggestion best for now, yes, better than the first few pieces I suggested.  So for now, the tentative setup should be:

k
c
-
-
gc
rs
-
gs
l
kn
n
-
p
-
-
-
-
-
P
-
N
Kn
L
Gs
-
RS
GC
-
-
C
K

31 squares total.  I forgot to mention, I am considering a different promotion value for the knight: the cavalryman from Ko Shogi.  I don't care much for this variant, and it doesn't even really come off as a shogi variant much.  But it technically is, and the piece is worthwhile.  It moves just like the knight of Western chess.  Though there is technically no perfect conversion for the horizontal-ish moves in 1D (as I had defined for the diagonal and orthogonally forward/backward moves), it seems to make sense to me that the sideways moves would translate to a step forward or a step backward.  If you think about it, if a knight made a sidways move, then was slide straight back onto its original file, it would be either one step ahead or behind its starting point, and on the opposite color as well.  That's my logic.  This means that the promoted piece would step one forward or backward, or jump to the third forward or backward.  It's obviously much more powerful, but the heavenly horse is a pretty weak promotion, so I'm wondering if that would be better.  Thoughts?  If we're agreed on all things here, we can probably start a game, and you may go first if you like.

We are now on version 8 of the board, version 1 being the Zillions version plus a couple squares...

I'm fine with the cavalryman as the promoted knight and with switching back to the HH should you change your mind. Is the abbreviation CM?

Since we seem to be in agreement, I'll make the first move: N-18.

You may abbreviate it that way.  Since it is a single word, I would probably keep the M lower case.

Gs-12

Gs-20

Kn-8

N-15

Well, I'm already somewhat unhappy with how this game is going, but I also remembered why I set things up the way I originally had it:  I wanted the knight and goose, which are both restricted to the same colored square in unpromoted form, to be on opposite colors of the ramshead soldier so it would be possible to unleash that piece if a player desired by moving other pieces out of the way.  For that reason I would suggest you switch your gold cannon and ramshead.  Unless this would have altered the way you would have played, I think this is a good idea.  It shouldn't affect my cannon/copper defense idea much because if a player still wanted to use it, he could simply move the ramshead forward in the early moves of the game.

But as for the knight so easily infiltrating enemy territory, this kind of bugs me.  Still needs some thought.  But we'll keep playing from here.  N-14

And perhaps it's not so bad, as the knight is a much more powerful piece than in the past, especially when promoted, so I'm not sure you want to capture, giving me the chance to capture and drop at the promoted value.  In any case, I know this game is going very slowly, but this is a very busy time.  Hopefully things will move along quicker soon.

Kn-24