darth_ender

I forgot to move last night.  Kn-10

I do worry about the fire demon for a couple of reasons:1) except for the king (and now the lion), I've tried to remain faithful to the original pieces as much as possible.  The more I change, the more it bothers me that this isn't a true 1D adaptation.  2) The cramped quarters of this game make the fire demon far too powerful.  In Tenjiku shogi pieces are completely removed, and there are pieces to spare, but in Ito Shogi, there is a small number, and either it will capture too many and add them to that player's arsenal, or it will completely destroy them, reducing armies to nothing very fast.  I have worked to try to limit the powerful pieces because I want this to be a game of combinations and tactics.  I'd worry about such a powerful piece reducing rather than enhancing the game's complexity.

That said, I agree that it might be good to have multiple variants with different degrees of power in the pieces.  Not so powerful as the fire demon, mind you, but nevertheless, one could probably have an interesting game with more exotic pieces or a game with more stepping pieces.  It'd be good to play with ideas.  We'll see.

Bxe5

I'm glad you still want to play :)

Hey, I'm staying up later than I should because I had a thought.  I've actually thought of it before, but I've resisted it because of the power of the piece.  But maybe it would be a good thing when we have a crowded board with a sort of deadlock in place, like right now.  In Tenjiku shogi, there are some very powerful generals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenjiku_shogi#Individual_pieces

Note the vice general, great general, bishop general, and rook general.  Perhaps the use of a rook general could actually spice up the game.  If I understand their rules correctly, they may only jump or capture pieces of lower "rank".  In a game with no other such generals, this would mean they cannot capture or jump each other, nor could they capture (meaning no check) or jump the king.  So they'd be powerful, but still not invincible.  They'd be scarier than the cannon, but also would be able to offset each other a bit.  They would only move like a rook (or on this 1D board, a reverse chariot), and if kept in the front, would offset each other rather nicely.  They'd be powerful, but severely limited.  And players would be hesitant to trade with them.

It might be too much though, and it might be better to just stick with the cannons.  Still not sure.  Just brainstorming as well.

As for weaker generals, I've been thinking along the same lines, except I thought it'd be good to have one towards the front and one towards the back.  I'll keep thinking, and if you want to keep proposing ideas, I'm open to them. :)

JEDIT: Correction: it appears that such generals either move and capture the same (i.e. a bishop general moves and captures just like a bishop), or it may jump over a number of pieces, subject to the above restrictions, but only when making a capture and not simply moving.  So I believe rook generals in Ito Shogi would be able to capture each other or check the king, but only when moving as rooks, not when jumping.

Gs-16

I really appreciate your looking at this.  I'm going to take another look at this in a bit, as I'm about to go to bed.  But I like what I see so far.

I did have another idea: remove the lance and gold cannon, but keep the reverse chariot and silver cannon as one piece with the chariot as the starting value.  This still keeps the piece count down, still keeps the sliding move available but with more flexibility (to get out of the way when needed), keeps the cannon from being too dominating in the game, and still matches up two pieces that move in a similar fashion (as I've tried to do with all the pieces).  So if you like, you may fiddle with that idea as well.  I'll give more feedback on your setup in the morning.  Thanks for your help.

Oh, I will say that I like the idea of bishop/dragon horse (which I'm thinking you probably meant instead of dragon king).  The ramshead soldier is cool, but I am glad you're experimenting with some more backward moving options.  We'll keep brainstorming.  Thanks again!

Certainly not.  I know your computer's been giving you trouble, but I was under the impression that in the past few days you'd lost interest.

Nxe5

I'm guessing we're done with this game, eh?

I thought you were aiming for some trap.  If you want to take your move back, it's fine.  And don't worry about over-analyzing this game.  It doesn't have to be a perfect science.  I'll still tweak it and I like to test ideas with you.  But perhaps you will be too busy to even play much.  If so that's fine.

And in response to Frink's last comment:

GBx14+P

@TV's, there are successful three and four dimensional chess games, but as far as I know, this is the most successful one dimensional game.  It still has flaws, but I am proud of how it is turning out.

Why don't you comment in the Trek thread, since you made such a clever reference? :)

i also am convinced that while it's good to have pieces that are able to move backward, even before promoting.  Or possibly some pieces that start out promoted, and end up demoted after capturing.  The first phase of this game is its weakest, when players are trying to figure out how to get their armies to clash without coming off at a disadvantage.  Forward movement forces players to interact, but with some ability to retreat (especially good if different from advancing, such as the goose), players can arrange and rearrange their front few pieces and thus plan a better attack.  So I'm thinking of making the knight a heavenly horse, for instance, with the promoted value the cavalryman.  Still thinking of other ideas.

Well, after much thought last night, I am positive that the lance has to go.  So any future arrangements you experiment with, cut him out.  He is more of a hindrance than a help for anyone.

Px15+GB

P-14

Or like I said, maybe we should just remove it.  Last game it didn't do much.  I'm also considering more changes, like maybe removing the gold cannon and ramshead soldier and just combining the bishop and silver cannon.  I'm not sure about this yet.  I really need to rethink more items.

N-17

I don't like the idea of the lance in front.  First of all, it could immediately trade with the other lance.  Not that this is necessarily bad, but it gives the first player control over the first few moves, should he choose to exchange.  Also, if lances were not immediately exchanged, then the pawn cannot move.  If a player wants to move his lance so his pawn can advance, he must move his lance away from the pawn defending it, leaving it open to counter attack.  Just to make the lance or pawn effective in the early moves, it would require moving other pieces from behind.  It really limits a lot of options.

It might actually be best to completely remove the piece.  But at the same time, it's kind of nice holding a piece that can't jump but can cover so many squares.  It sort of is a two-edged sword.

darth kaos

Kn-10.  Gotta go to bed.  Did you switch your RS and GC?  I value your opinion in this game, so I'm curious about your thoughts on the switch.  Anyhow, goodnight, and talk to you soon. :)

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.

B-d6

Kn-8

Ooh, I've got a good one:

Darth Kaos vs. Count Von Siegfried of KAOS, the international organization of evil!

Yeah?  Yeah?

Wow, that lineup!  Awwh uyeahhh!!!!

Two threads with exactly the same OPs!  How weird!

RicOlie_2 said:

February 18:

A.D. 1787: Austrian Emperor Jozef II bans children under eight years old from labour.

 A civil liberties visionary...

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

Gs-12

I had the same issue with my scanner.  I mentioned VirtualBox before.  You can emulate a different PC and install an older version of Windows or some other OS with it.  I installed XP (for older shogi software actually), and was able to install my scanner on that.  You can then share files between you real PC and virtual PC, so I can still scan pictures and access them in Windows 7.  Just an idea.

JEDIT: You could also just take a picture of the rules with a digital camera, assuming you can get a decent resolution.

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.

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.