RicOlie_2

Thank you. ;)

March 19:

A.D. 1279: A Mongolian victory at Yamen ends Chinese Song rule.

A.D. 1452: Frederick III Hapsburg is crowned Holy Roman Emperor.

A.D. 1702: Anne Stuart becomes Queen of England.

A.D. 1918: U.S. Congress authorizes time zones and approves daylight savings time.

Why did they bother...I hate daylight savings time. :P

A.D. 1999: A very important member of this forum enters into the world. ;)

Egg wraps and homemade borscht...yummy. :)

I like the SC as a piece and used to use it quite a bit when it was the weaker value of the SC/GC piece. I agree with that change and hopefully it will see more use.

I am all for alternating promotions because they make small games far more interesting and gives more opportunity to use the stronger value of pieces, allowing for more variety. So let's stick with that but revert to the weak value only for drops.

I'll let you begin the game if we are in agreement and you don't have any other changes you'd like to recommend.

Let's say it again Frink:

"Leia and Chewie would make the best parents."

I don't think it's attack and ridicule. Darklord is on the right track and Puggo's question is an entirely valid one.

I'd rather just begin a new game. I made too many mistakes and I can't see any good comebacks heading my way, so I think I will accept the checkmate.

I think I prefer the drops being limited to the weaker value, but I think that's largely because I find it difficult to keep track of the possible drops when there are twice as many. I'm sure that will come with time and practice. I do enjoy the games more when I'm able to keep track of more (and I do much better), but I don't want that to limit your options, because it shouldn't. I do have another reason for opposing greater drop options. Powerful pieces, like the bishop, can be dropped onto the board with no specific capture in mind, but they can cover a lot of the board and prevent the other player from making many moves. I find the game less enjoyable if pieces with such great coverage can be dropped onto the board because they limit other pieces so much. If a bishop cannot be dropped onto the board, however, and only a flying swallow can, it is only a danger to pieces in front of it and one square behind it. This doesn't limit the other player as much, but it can still be used effectively.

Hopefully you understand what I'm getting at, because I may have worded my argument poorly, but in short, I vote for weak value drops only.

And before you offer, I won't take it back. 

;)

Shoot....

Cm-5

March 18:

A.D. 37: Tiberius' will is nullified by the Roman Senate, and Caligula is proclaimed heir.

A.D. 1123: The First Lateran Council opens in Rome.

A.D. 1314: Jacques de Molay, the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar is burned at the stake.

A.D. 1940: Benito Mussolini joins Germany's war against France and Britain.

Wait, what? I've got a goose on 14 (well, it's yours, but that's what I'm seeing on my board), not a phoenix...

T*15

darth_ender said:

Sorry for that error.  Don't know why I would have believed I had such a piece in my arsenal.  The only error I see your board is the presence of T/S in my hand, as I just dropped one and you have one in hand.

Thanks, I forgot to remove the T/S from your piece box.

Ph*22

 B-28

Possessed said:

RicOlie_2 said:

The chances of intelligent life evolving on other planets in our universe without a master designer is, are I said, incredibly slim, even in a universe this size. This wouldn't be the case in an infinite universe, though, which would be infinitely larger than ours, and thus have an infinitely greater chance of producing multiple intelligent life forms.

With an intelligent designer, the chances of intelligent life elsewhere are significantly greater, though that depends on the nature of said designer.

 If there is a supernatural force helping us along, why does that necessarily mean they haven't helped other places as well?  Even if you believe the bible, nowhere in the bible does it say we are alone in the universe.

(but it does say the earth is round and also that the continents used to be together as one which was not accepted as fact until much later but that's a debate for another time)

 Why does that necessarily mean they haven't helped other places as well? It certainly doesn't and I never said such a thing, so you're asking the wrong person. I meant that the chances of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is incredibly slim without an intelligent designer. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we are alone in the universe and nowhere in the teachings of the Catholic Church does it say we are (as Bingowings said, it doesn't say we aren't either).

Sorry, but according to my board you don't have a cavalryman. Did you forget to take my move back before making your move? Here's my board and pieces in hand so you can compare:

K
GB
-
-
-
Cm
-
SC
-
-
-
-
-
Gs
-
P
B
-
-
S
HH
-
-
RC
-
B
-
-
-
K
-

T/S
Gs/Ph, T/S

RC-24

March 17:

45 B.C.: Julius Caesar defeats the forces of Titus Labienus and Pompey the Younger in the Battle of Mundus.

A.D. 180: Marcus Aurelius dies.

A.D. 432: According to tradition, St. Patrick is captured by pirates and carried off to Ireland as a slave on this day.

I forgot about listening to this. :P I was planning to, but I guess I'll have to do that later and give my feedback then...

Only people who were important to many, many people, or who are very well known, make the news. If the news reported on every single death, there wouldn't be room for anything else in the news. Additionally, people would stop reading the news because it would be largely irrelevant. With people dying every few seconds around the world, there are just too many deaths to be reported. You can mention people close to you who have died here, but it's meaningless to report every death you hear about. This thread would be hundreds of pages long if everyone did that.

RC-22

If you insist... :)

Cm*6

The chances of intelligent life evolving on other planets in our universe without a master designer is, are I said, incredibly slim, even in a universe this size. This wouldn't be the case in an infinite universe, though, which would be infinitely larger than ours, and thus have an infinitely greater chance of producing multiple intelligent life forms.

With an intelligent designer, the chances of intelligent life elsewhere are significantly greater, though that depends on the nature of said designer.

Crud. I wasn't paying much attention and dropped it on the wrong square... :P I won't take it back though because I've taken enough moves back already and I don't think I have a chance of winning anyway. Better to get it over with than drag it out a few extra turns.

RC-22

However, the chances of intelligent life evolving without a supernatural force guiding the process is extremely slim, which is why it is doubtful that there is other intelligent life in this universe which is only finite, not infinite. In an infinite universe, the chances of life would be infinitely higher.

I'm not sure what I intended to accomplish by my last move. :P

Cm*5