darth_ender

TV's Frink said:

It's not just my situation - I believe there are.others where abortion is justified.

It also seems unnecessary to post happy non-abortion news here.  A bit of a poke in the eye, actually.

 I've said many times that I believe there are situations where it is justified.  However, since you have used your situation on more than one occasion to make a point, I am interested in knowing more about it.  If you don't feel like sharing it, I understand.

And I share the news here because, as your very sad personal anecdote has affirmed to you the right to be pro-choice, mine has simply reaffirmed to me the need to be pro-life.  I cannot look at that ultrasound and believe all those things that I just typed (i.e. "bunch of cells").  It is so precious to me, and I felt the need to share that news in a way that is meaningful to me.  I don't see how anyone can look at that child and think anything less of it.

If personal anecdotes are able to justify abortions, I don't see why I can't share anecdotes to justify life!

Since I don't understand your situation more fully, Frink, I truly would appreciate an explanation to ensure I don't accidentally misstep in my words or feelings.  I'm not asking in judgment.  However, it would help me be more fair in future statements.

Okay, these are some of the ideas I've come up with in order to meet the following shortcomings of the existing game:

1) Unpromoted pieces in general (though not always) should have some backward movement, but different and preferably weaker than their forward movement.

2) Pieces need to be more offensive than defensive.

3) The setup needs to also be geared more for offense than defense.

4) There should not be too many pieces regardless of board size, or else they defend too many squares and the board gets really cluttered and difficult to effectively move on, particularly in certain sections where action is taking place.  It is especially wise to avoid moves that cover too many adjacent squares so there are "holes" in a piece's coverage.

5) Promoted pieces should have stronger abilities, including improved backward movement, but should still not be too powerful; there still need to be gaps in their coverage.  The only exception would be the lance or similar piece, whatever we decide on, and this is compensated for by its inability to jump at all.

6) Though I believe alternately promoting and demoting adds an interesting dimension for both sides when their moves are very different (as in Micro Shogi where a gold general promotes to a rook), since pieces have similar style moves in most cases on both sides, it might be best to at least try permanent promotion and the ability to drop only the weaker face up.

7) I therefore wish to use the following pieces with brief descriptions of their moves.  All are based on pre-existing pieces following strict interpretive rules for changing them to single-dimensional moves, which you already know.

Pawn/Go Between - You already know this one
King - You know this one too
Tile General/Copper General: T-jumps to second square forward or steps one square back/C-steps one square forward or back, or jumps to second square forward
Heavenly Horse/Cavalryman: HH-jumps to third square forward or back/Cm-steps one square forward or back or jumps to third square forward or back
Goose/Phoenix: This one you know
Howling Dog/Silver Cannon: I'm still not sure about how I want to do this one.  I was talking about using the reverse chariot, but I also might just want to use the howling dog instead, which moves like a lance, but also has the option to take a single step backwards
Flying Swallow/Bishop: FS-like a bishop foward, or one step backward/B-you already know

That's it for now.  I may want to still use the reverse chariot instead of the howling dog, but otherwise, I think I want to try this piece combination.  I'm almost tempted to end our current game and give this a chance, but I still need to work out the setup.

I saw my most recent sub-person bunch of cells today for the first time!  It was neat to see this genetically unique, but altogether unimportant (yet) lifeform.  I watched its tiny little appendages moving against my wife's full bladder, its heart beating, stimulated by its own pacemaker cells, propelling minuscule amounts of blood through its 9 week-old bloodstream.  This non-viable organism will no doubt further alter my wife's body, making her less likely to ever pose for the cover of Cosmopolitan.  My limited financial resources will certainly be further strained.  There will be one more mouth in this world to consume its finite resources.

It was the most beautiful thing I've ever seen...except for my other children and my not-as-skinny-as-she-used-to-be, stretch-mark-covered wife :)

This is an interesting topic, but I doubt I'd be very good at it.  I seem to remember hearing years ago that Alfred Hitchcock was the first to create the effect of zooming in and stretching the shot simultaneously (as in Jaws, when it dawns on the sheriff that the shark is attacking).  Hitchcock did it first with Vertigo I believe.  But then, I might be completely mistaken.

Incidentally, Vertigo is one of my favorite movies.  Just FYI. :)

Sorry, yes, I did mean GB-16.

L-10

Copper can go to 29 but not 30.

Perhaps another idea is to have pieces promote when they capture (as in very large shogi variants), but when captured and dropped, may only be dropped in their weaker form.  This would keep the focus on the offensive, forward moving faces.  Still not sure about that.  Just an idea for now.

GB-15

I'm also thinking about the nature of this game.  It is very difficult to force a checkmate unless you have a significant material advantage, as I ultimately did last game.  I have fallen prey to trying to make this like a regular shogi game, and I had the right idea in the first place.  This needs to be a game with a strong offense and weak defense, otherwise it lasts forever.  If players are close in strength, they might never get to the end.  So we have to get generals away from the king, for instance.  We need it to be only slightly defensive so that no player can force a mate with a single drop on the right square.  Another reason to get rid of the gold cannon (as I started envisioning it as a defensive piece).  Perhaps we even need to have pieces starting further ahead of the king, with a gap pf at least 3 squares between him and his army.

If we do use it in the more powerful version, I'd rather have a more powerful lion as I mentioned before.  But then again, maybe I won't with other pieces in play.

I'm glad you like the idea of RC/SC.  It makes sense to me.  I'm also starting to think, looking at our board, that there are just too many pieces.  We need to cut back.  And combining pieces is one way to do it.

cm*21

While I agree that such is extremely disappointing, I don't think it's right to humiliate someone for failure.  I've beaten you at several games of chess, the last two with a handicap in your favor, and often due to some serious error in judgment on your part that cost you the whole game.  But I don't rub it in your face.  I encourage you.  I challenge you again because that's how you get better.  To improve a player, you don't destroy their morale.  You build it up and encourage.

Thinking about the lion, I think it's too weak.  While perhaps a true translation would be too strong (up to four squares forward or backward, as opposed to two as we have it now), perhaps a translation of up to three squares in either direction would be a good compromise.  It would be more potent (as it seems rather impotent at present), yet not over the top.

On the other hand, part of what makes the game work is the fact that pieces are unable to cover certain squares.  They may have reach, but have gaps in their reach as well.  So perhaps the lion just needs to go, as there is no weakness within its reach.  In fact, now that I've typed both these paragraphs, I'm pretty sure it needs to go.  But considering the way this game has played, I'm less certain about eliminating the lance.  As you pointed out yesterday and as I'm seeing today, it still has its uses despite its limitations.  The gold cannon, on the other hand, is nearly useless.  So I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that I'll need to combine the two: reverse chariot (strong face of the lance, but still pretty tied up among its own pieces, yet useful in situations) on one side, with the silver cannon (much more versatile and potent, yet having weaknesses as well when opponents get close) on the other.

I again want to reiterate that I think we could have multiple 1D variants, at least one with weaker pieces and one with stronger.  But first, I want to create an ideally balanced game, followed by the others.

GB*22

Gsx18+Ph

Gs-20

RCx24+L

RC*26

I made a bad move and caught it.  I miscalculated.  See my edited post above.  Sorry!

Gs*16

Nx20+Cm

Knx14+Ln

I did mean Kn-12.  Sorry.  And since you already moved, Gs-14.

It's beautiful Adywan!  I am getting very excited over this release!  I remember joining up here nearly 3 years ago with this thing "almost ready" to be released, and then....it obviously has had plenty more work to go on it.  Nevertheless, I've waited patiently for so long, and I believe it really is almost ready to be released, and I'm only more excited than ever.  Keep it up!

And I agree 100% about Angel.  Great ideas, but very different.