[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by GregoryStrong
Chess with Ultima, Rococo and Supremo Pieces. A series of variants with the Orthochess array transplanted to a 10x10 board and various exotic pieces added. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Aug 7, 2004 07:15 PM UTC:<p>Thanks! Let me ask you, though, since you have played both ...</p>
<p>Do you have any relative opinion of this on 10x10 vs. 10x8? You mention that both work well, but do you think that one works better than the other? Or, in other words, is it worth implementing both in your opinion?</p>
Ultima. Game where each type of piece has a different capturing ability. Also called Baroque. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Aug 7, 2004 07:25 PM UTC:<p>Dear Mr. Duke,</p>
<p>In your recent comments, you mention a Positional Advantage Equation, the details of which may be found under the Game Design topic. I am interested in <i>anything</i> related to mathetmatical analysis of positions, but I cannot find this Game Design forum...</p>
<p>Sincerely,<br>
Greg Strong</p>
Chess with Ultima, Rococo and Supremo Pieces. A series of variants with the Orthochess array transplanted to a 10x10 board and various exotic pieces added. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Aug 7, 2004 07:45 PM UTC:<p>Also, related to evalulation of pieces ... I have the following values for Ultima pieces (in Ultima):<br>
Withdrawer = 3.1, Coordinator = 2.9, Long leaper = 5.3, Immoblizer = 8.2</p>
<p>Anyone have any thoughts on how these values apply when each piece is taken in isolation and dropped into an FIDE Chess army, as in this game? Or values for the Advancer, Swapper, or Pushme-Pullyu?</p>
Mainzer Schach. Large variant with Janus, Marshall, and different setup. (11x8, Cells: 88) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2004 08:32 PM UTC:Good ★★★★I would like to second David's comments, particularly regarding the pawn promotion. You have created a new piece combining all moves which can only be attained by pawn promotion; I see little reason to offer under-promotion. You already have to have an Amazon piece in the set, so you shouldn't need the option to promote to weaker pieces for that reason. Also, the more promotion options you allow, the slower computer programs which play the game become. The more promotion options there are, the more legal moves there are, and the larger the search tree becomes.
I do think this game looks interesting, though. I like the starting array, especially the symmetry. I'll post a Game Courier invitation shortly, and give it a try...
Greg Strong wrote on Wed, Aug 18, 2004 01:15 AM UTC:<p>Ahhh, I had not considered that. I had previously thought that under-promotion was just for psychological impact (which makes it silly for computer-chess, as the computer can't be intimidated or confused.) I guess your thought might be right-on, though, but I wonder how rare this situation is. Does anyone know of an example of a professional Chess game in which this happened?</p>
ChessV
. Program for playing numerous Chess variants against your PC.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]📝Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Aug 29, 2004 04:16 PM UTC:<h4>ChessV 0.6 released</h4>
<p>Added support for:
<ul>
<li><a href='/large.dir/freeling.html'>Grand Chess</a></li>
<li><a href='/large.dir/janus.html'>Janus Chess</a></li>
<li><a href='/large.dir/unicorn.html'>Unicorn Chess</a> and <a href='http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/presets/unicorn_great_chess.html'>Unicorn Great Chess</a>
</ul></p><p>Also supports <a href='/large.dir/chess-with-ultima.html'>Chess with Ultima, Rococo and Supremo Pieces</a> with the following pieces: <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/withdrawer.html'>Withdrawer</a>, <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/advancer.html'>Advancer</a>, <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/coordinator.html'>Coordinator</a>, and the <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/longleaper.html'>Long Leaper</a>. Full Ultima support isn't too far away now, and should be available in the next version.</p><p>This version also includes many small feature and user-interface improvements, and many, many bug fixes. <a href='http://sourceforge.net/projects/chessv'>Download from Sourceforge.net here</a>.</p>
📝Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Aug 31, 2004 09:56 PM UTC:Thank you, Robert. Actually, there is something that you (and others) can do to help. If you beat it (as you did in Grand Chess), and if it's obvious how you did it, that information could be helpful to me. It should be possible to tweak the evaluation function to fix strategical weaknesses, provided we can identify those weaknesses. A save-game file could be helpful to me, too. Of course, I realise that often a win is achieved by staying slightly ahead throughout the game, and not by exploiting some weakness, but if you (or anyone else) does identify some specific weakness, I would like to know about it! In any event, if anyone beats ChessV in a game in which it is able to calculate to a reasonable depth (depending on time and speed of your computer), I would appreciate it if you could e-mail the save-game file to me!
Recognized Chess Variants. Index page listing the variants we feel are most significant. (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Mon, Sep 13, 2004 04:04 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★I agree completely with all of Tony's comments. I have found the Recognized Variants list to be a very useful starting point when trying to find the most popular and interesting games from the literally hundreds that are described on this site.
Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2004 02:01 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★<p>Oh yeah, Fergus. I think you are right on the money. I was already thinking about the need to segregate, but I was considering categories more like the catagorizations on the <a href='/Gindex.html'>Main Index</a> page. But I think that your classification, buy degree of <i>prestige</i>, and <i>time-testedness</i>, (to invent a word,) really makes a lot of sense. And the CVPA acronym sure is sweet icing on the case! Good work!!!</p>
Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2004 06:21 PM UTC:<p>IMHO, Star-Trek Tri-D Chess, and Los Alamos chess, are the two obvious ones that don't belong, for the reasons you mention. I agree that it makes sense to create a 'historical interest' category as well, for games like <a href='/historic.dir/chaturanga.html'>Chaturanga</a>, <a href='/historic.dir/chaturang4.html'>Chaturanga for Four Players</a>, <a href='/historic.dir/shatranj.html'>Shatranj</a>, and <a href='/historic.dir/tamerlane.html'>Tamerlane Chess</a>. Whether or not Star-Trek and Los Alamos belong even here would be a question for the community.</p>
<p>As to the proposed process of weeding, I would agree that some weeding should occur, but I don't like the threshold of exactly ten for all categories. I think the threshold for weeding should be larger for the lower categories. The bottom category, the Acclaimed games, in particular, should be allowed to grow rather large; I think even 40 or 50 in this category wouldn't be unreasonable. This site has hundreds and hundreds of games. I think many people who like to look through, and read the rules for games just for fun, would appreciate having a listing of those games on the site that have actually been playtested and enjoyed. And I would hate to see that list limited to any small number. For the Popular and Vintage categories, a threshold of 10 might be reasonable.</p>
<p>For the top level classification, it seems to me that an exact definition of what's in and what's out is in order, so here's my humble suggestion: <blockquote>A game that is played <i>exactly in its current form</i> by at least one million people, and has been played by at least one million people for at least one hundred years.</blockquote> Of course, this would also include <a href='/oriental.dir/koreanchess.html'>Changgi (Korean Chess)</a>, along with Fergus' great three, but I see no reason for it to be excluded. This definition also sets the exact conditions for games to fall out of the list as well ... If the game is ever played by less than a million players, then it has lost too much popularity, and should be dropped to the next lower bracket (Vintage.) The other possibility is that the game mutates, i.e., the rules of the game change and fewer people are playing with the old rules than with the new rules. In this case, the game should drop to Vintage, and the new version won't qualify for Classic status until the new version is dominant for at least one hundred years.</p>
<p>As for those you list as Popular or Acclaimed, may I humbly suggest that <a href='/unequal.dir/cwda.html'>Chess with Different Armies</a> be Popular, and <a href='/3d.dir/dragonchess.html'>Dragonchess</a> be Acclaimed. <a href='/3d.dir/startrek.html'>Star-Trek</a> and <a href='/small.dir/losalamos.html'>Los Alamos</a> should be in the new Historical Interest category, or none at all. I have no opinion on the others you leave open (Magnetic, McCooney's Hex, and Wildebeast.)</p>
<p>Thanks again for your great work on these important classifications, Fergus!</p>
Rococo. A clear, aggressive Ultima variant on a 10x10 ring board. (10x10, Cells: 100) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Sep 18, 2004 06:41 PM UTC:Swapper question ... Can a swapper perform 'mutual destruction' with a friendly piece? The rules aren't clear on this. Thanks!
Carrera's Chess. Large chess variant from 17th century Italy. (10x8, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Sep 21, 2004 02:25 AM UTC:Ohhh... Thank you for pointing this out! I will have to update ChessV to correct this. Actually, I'd like to add support for the Duniho variant, too (now that I'm aware of its existance.) Is this OK Fergus? and what are the additional rules? Thanks! Greg LATER EDIT: I had posted this before Fergus had posted his additional comment. Now I'm really confused ... :)
Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Sep 21, 2004 04:17 PM UTC:Hmmm... I do like the idea of the Enhanced Castling presented here, but it might be a bit too powerful. How about a half-enhanced castling, in which the King can go as far as desired, but the Rook must then always be placed just on the other side? That should be a little easier to program, and I think I like the rule better, too... I don't like giving the King a free choice of any square, *and* letting the Rook pick the open file, all on the same move.
Recognized Chess Variants. Index page listing the variants we feel are most significant. (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Wed, Sep 22, 2004 03:43 PM UTC:I still like the social aspect of sitting at a table with the friend I'm playing, and pushing pieces around. I'm not sure that everything should be done from behind a computer, just because we can ...
Games for Game Courier. The many games you can play online with Game Courier.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Sep 26, 2004 08:24 PM UTC:<p>The Game Courier seems to be having a problem. On the <a href='/index/whatsnew.php'>what's new page</a>,
if I click on Last Game Courier Move link, to show the index, I get this
error:
<p>Parse error: parse error, unexpected T_STRING in
/home/chessvar/public_html/play/pbmlogs/anti-king_chess_ii/markthompson-ben_good-2004-264-065.php
on line 82
ChessV. Program for playing numerous Chess variants against your PC.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]📝Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Sep 28, 2004 05:48 PM UTC:Thank you for your feedback, and I sincerely do appreciate it. May I ask which game you were playing? ChessV is better at some games than others. It would also help me if you could tell me which operating system you use. I seem to have problems with Windows 98/ME that I don't have with 2000/XP. Also, save-game files of any game in which you win are helpful. Thanks again! If you are having problems with bugs, please wait for a couple of new versions. I am about to stop adding new games, and concentrating on fixing all bugs. When I feel it is a stable as possible, I will release version 1.0
📝Greg Strong wrote on Wed, Sep 29, 2004 03:27 PM UTC:Sorry for the delay, Roberto, I've been distracted by a couple of things ... I will have version 0.7, Ultima-enabled, posted either late this evening, or tomorrow. Of course, I'll make a post here when it's up. Thanks for your continued interest!
Maniac: Chess and Chess Variants Program . Chess and Chess Variants Program.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Wed, Sep 29, 2004 03:34 PM UTC:Yes, I was excited to see this program, as I had never noticed it before and am happy to see other freeware chess-variant programs. I was disapointed, though, to see that it doesn't appear to have been updated since 2001. Too bad, this program looks to have potential. Also, too bad that it's in Visual Basic :)
Kristensen's Game. A conscious attempt to restructure Chess from 1948. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sat, Oct 2, 2004 04:30 PM UTC:Poor ★I haven't given a game a 'poor' rating yet, but I really can't give this game anything else. The first thing I think when I look at this is 'Isn't there ANYTHING about the game of Chess that was ok as-is?' He changed the number of files, the number of ranks; changed the move of the Rook, the Bishop, the Pawns (no enpassant) ... He re-arranged the pawns! He doubled the number of Queens!!! And then there's the barrier pawn, which might make center-play more interesting, but boy is it nothing like a 'normal' Chess piece. And no resigning?!? I won't even comment on that one. On the up-side, yes, he did add symmetry, but I just can't see giving it a 'good' rating. It just looks like an extreme over-reach that wasn't all that well thought-out. Of course, I must admit that I haven't played it (yet) ... It is possible that my opinion would improve.
ChessV. Program for playing numerous Chess variants against your PC.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]📝Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Oct 3, 2004 06:01 PM UTC:<h3>ChessV 0.7 Released</h3>
<p>Adds support for the following games:<ul><li><a href='/other.dir/ultima.html'>Ultima</a></li><li><a href='/large.dir/grotesque.html'>Grotesque Chess</a></li><li><a href='http://play.chessvariants.org/pbm/play.php?game%3DLions+and+Unicorns+Chess%26settings%3DLandUChess'>Lions and Unicorns Chess</a></li></ul></p>
<p>Enhances <a href='/large.dir/chess-with-ultima.html'>Chess with Ultima, Rococo and Supremo Pieces</a> by adding support for <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/immobilizer.html'>the Immobilizer</a>, the Swapper, <a href='/piececlopedia.dir/pushmepullyu.html'>the Pushme-Pullyu</a>, and the Mimotaur.</p>
<p>Also added support for couple of small features, and numerous bug fixes.<br><a href='http://sourceforge.net/projects/chessv'>Download from sourceforge.net here</a><br>Enjoy!</p>
Ultima. Game where each type of piece has a different capturing ability. Also called Baroque. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Oct 3, 2004 07:11 PM UTC:Since you all provided so much input into evaluation, I thought you might be interested in the various terms I used in the Ultima evaluation function for ChessV... I used George Duke's piece values of Pawn = 1000, Withdrawer = 3100, Coordinator = 2900, Chameleon = 4300, Long Leaper = 5300, and Immobilizer = 8200. All immobilized pieces are penalized -25% of their value. The Withdrawer gets a small bonus proportional to the value of the most valuable adjacent enemy piece (provided there is at least 1 square in the opposite direction for it to move into, although it need not be vacant presently.) The Coordinator gets a small bonus proportional to the number of enemy pieces on the same rank or file as the friendly King. The Chameleon gets a couple small bonuses: for standing adjacent to an enemy Withdrawer (if there is at least 1 square in the opposite direction to move into), and when the enemy coordinator is on the same rank or file as the friendly King. The Immobilizer gets no bonuses, instead immobilized pieces are penalized. The Long Leaper also has no bonuses, but only because I have no good answers here. Roberto correctly points out that the Long Leaper is more valuable if the enemy pieces are not clustered, and not on the edge, but I cannot think of a way to determine that without spending far too much CPU time. I will continue to think about it. Also, in the opening, pieces are given a bonus for the first move (development), a small penalty for moving twice, and a large penalty for moving the same piece three or more times. These adjustments are slowly scaled down as the game progresses into the middle-game.
Greg Strong wrote on Sun, Oct 3, 2004 11:00 PM UTC:The bugs you metion would a dramatic effect on play skill, even with a good evaluation function. I'll have to take care of those, and post an update ... Thanks for the test-report!
Mecklenbeck chess. Pawns can promote on the sixth row.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]📝Greg Strong wrote on Mon, Oct 4, 2004 05:20 PM UTC:According to Pritchard, this game is titled 'Mecklenbeck', not 'Mecklenberg', Chess...
Extended Chess. Standard setup with changes in moves and win conditions. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Oct 5, 2004 04:08 AM UTC:This game is interesting enough that I would like to try it, but I would like to have seen a little more introduction; that is, a bit more rational for why these specific rules were chosen. It seems almost all pieces have been changed, but not in any consistent way. It says that you have increased the mobility of some pieces, and decreased others to provide 'an equalization of forces' ... which makes a lot of sense ... but the two pieces in standard Chess which are pretty much equal (Bishop and Knight) you have potentialy un-balanced by changing both. In particular, I think you have made the Knight better than the Bishop. In any event, I would like to see some explaination of how this balances things (and exactly what is now balanced.)
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.