Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Good use of links in the body of the text.

I'd agree that this article could be vastly improved with some graphics. 


Fergus, which side of the Atlantic are you on right now?  Here in the
Midwest of the United States the word 'hump' has plenty of non-obscene
uses.  It is similar to the word 'bump'.  Real (non-chess) camels have
humps on their backs, as does Quasimodo.  Today, Wednesday, can be
referred to as 'hump day', meaning the middle of the work week. 
(Because 'It's all downhill from here.')

Perhaps I didn't present the information well enough to make adding a
diagram straightforward. Using U for Hump as initials for the rest, the
games look something like this, which I hope helps editor and reader
alike.
    Mitregi     Humpmitregi3   PPCCPPCCPP  PPCCCPPCCCPP
2    R B  B R    R B    B R
1   WHMSGKSMHW  WHMUSGHSUMHW
I can see the case for a snappier name for Humpmitregi, and perhaps for
Mitregi iself. Any suggestions are welcome, with translations if relevant.

With regard to Michael Howe's question on promotion: P/W/H => G, C/M/U =>
S (note the symmetry), R/B as standard Shogi, G/S/K are unpromotable (so
that, as in standard Shogi, no piece is both promotable and a promotee).
	Where can pieces not be reintroduced? Where immediate promotion would be
AUTOMATIC - far rank for all FO pieces, penultimate rank for Helms, entire
enemy camp for Humps. Points cannot be reintroduced to give two
(unpromoted) on the same file, but CAN on files which had none in the
array. Colourbound pieces are restricted to the array total, broken down
by type and binding.
	Why the name changes? To avoid carrying misleading connotations, and to
allow easy extrapolation to other directions, or to avoid confusion when
mixing with Occidental pieces. I cannot help but think that part of the
adverse reaction to Shanghai Palace is the need to keep qualifying Pawn or
Knight with the game that it is from. If the first two FO pieces are named
after some attribute of the corresponding symmetric piece other
attributes
will have an obvious meaning. When my 4x4x8 Tunnelshogi comes out it will
have a piece called the Horn, clearly the FO version of the Unicorn.
	Regarding the names, would '10-file Mitregi' and '12-file Mitregi' be
better?

Actually, I think Mitregi works quite well if you don't try to pronounce
it as a compound of Mitre and Gi.  With a short i (as in the first
syllable of mittens) and an unaccented second syllable you get a word that
rolls off the tongue fairly well. 

'mit-ruh-GEE'

For the larger variant I would propose Humpregi.  Not good, but maybe
better than Humpmitregi.

Nice.  But I think Glenn Overby's PromoChess is better.

The more I think about it, the more I am liking these variants,
particularly the Mitre.  It seems like a nifty little piece.  The Hump is
a little less obvious direction to go in, and I worry about its
usefullness on an average-sized or small board.

The mixed pawn line seems inelegant to me.  As a matter of personal
preference I would like the pawn line to be all one type of piece.

Mike,

I did say that Mitregi was a nice game.

The comparison to PromoChess is appropriate.  It's more like comparing
red apples to green apples.  Both are attempts to 'westernize' Shogi. 
All Shogi do not have drops.  

Both have the application of westernized Pawns, two Bishops and two Rooks.
PromoChess contains the Camel, Mitregi suggests the Camel in a variant.

Regardless of the drops in Mitregi, the promotion possibilities are far
more interesting in PromoChess.

And there have been actual games played with PromoChess.  I am un-aware of
any game having actually been played with Mitregi. It appears to be simply
an academic study at this point.  But it is definitely nice.

Maybe Glenn might consider the application of drops in a future variant? 
Hint, hint.

The graphics and headings are good. Taking the comments since my last in
alphabetical order:
	Grand Mitre Shogi: This is no less cumbersome than Humpmitregi. Grand
Shogi would be snappier and sum up an array with 5 types of piece from
the
3rd file inwards, but would it be too immodest?
	Hump leap length: Perhaps I should consider a 12x12 version, and suffix
all forms with #cells - Mitregi 90, Mitregi 108, Mitregi 144.
	Humpregi: A better contraction would be Humitregi, as it would preserve
better the link to the 10-file variant (if the original name for that is
retained).
	Hybridity of name: This is due to my ignorance of Japanese and a wish to
name the variant after the new piece for easy association. I welcome
suggestions for Japanese words on which to tag -gi. Since my last comment
I notice that Mitregi can also be read as a German-Latin hybrid meaning
'with the King', which fits the use of Shogi generals but highlights
the
unintended connotations of names starting with Hump.
	Mitre Shogi: This is still a hybrid, and less snappy than Mitregi, but
might tie in with my forthcoming 3d Shogi variant being named
Tunnelshogi.
	Mixed 3rd rank: This was to give something resembling Pawn structure
while preserving Shogi's absence of divergent pieces. I agree that 5 of
each would be untidy; 6 to 4 reflects the balance of 1st-rank pieces.
Tunnelshogi will have a 3rd rank full of Princelings, all combining the
moves of both pieces.
	Promo Chess comparison: Different inventors' ideas often converge. The
Promo array has similarities to my Bachelor Kamil, but the inspiration is
quite different. Mitregi promotion is intended as a development of
Shogi's, retaining something of the simplicity lacking in Promo. There
are no end of combinations of ideas. In time I will submit a FIDE-array
variant named Bishogi (does Bi mean anything in Japanese?), differing
from
Chessgi in that simple pieces are promotable to Queen on reaching the
enemy camp and captured promotees are reintroduced unpromoted.
	Reintroducing colourbounds: Perhaps the restrictions on these are too
harsh and/or complex. I am considering relaxing them to twice the array
number, so that someone capturing all enemy pieces of a type before
promoting their own can deploy them all.
	Stripe: Reference to this piece reinforces my claim that my piece names
are self-evident. Michael Howe overstates the problem with 3 oblique
leapers, as there is no compounding, but I agree that adding a 3rd is
unnecessary. It would actually detract from the symmetry as the 3:2
direction has its own dual, 5:1. Tunnelshogi will have no oblique pieces.
	Xhogi: Does Xho mean anything, in any language? I am not keen on that
name for my own variant. It also suggests that this is to Shogi what
Xhess
is to FIDE Chess, rather than (as intented) what FIDE Chess or perhaps
Courier is to Chaturanga.

Charles,

You might simply write the title of the game as 'MitreGi'.  This would
emphasize these sets of syllables and distinguish them one from the
other.

And so, 'HumpMitreGi' or 'Hump-MitreGi' might be considered for the
variant.

Michael Howe's dislike for my piece names is a matter of taste. What
grates for me is giving the same name to very different pieces, and a
forward-only piece IS very different from its symmetric version. The
2nd-rank pieces in Mitregi are placed at their FIDE intervals. An obvious
further variant would have Knights in the Occidental sense, perhaps
promotable to Gnu, in front of the Mitres, and I would wish to call those
and those alone Knights rather than go down the Shanghai Palace road of
multi-purpose piece names.
	As for not being self-evident, did anyone have trouble understanding
Stripe in the comment originally mentioning it?
On a positive note, I look forward to Shin Shogi.

A belated response to Michael Howe's follow-up to me, 28 May:

It was not my intention to either (re)name Charles Gilman's game
for him or create a variant of my own using his game as a source.
What I wanted to do is provide a partial ZRF implementation
for other people to play with, build upon and eventually develop
into whatever final form this game assumes (unfortunately, I have
too little leisure now to take a more active part in this).
I was using 'Xhogi' merely as a working name for this draft,
but without insisting on this game (or a variant of it) being
called so.

Unfortunately, CV's comment editor has munched the URL I included,
((http://www.math.bas.bg/ml/iad/tyalie/xhogi.zip)).

Having considered all the comments all these variants, regarding both the
names and how the pieces fit in with board size, I am now planning to
revise the names of the present versions and add two new larger ones.
However the latter will use the Knight and Camel (both promotable to Gnu)
alongside their forward-only versions, and my one concern is that David
Howe's generally-commendable graphics might get confusing.
	Possibly more suited to a mixture of several types of symmetric and
forward-only piece are the graphics used on the Tamerlane Chess page, with
the small images representing forward-only versions of those represented by
the corresponding large ones, assuming that large and small Bishop images
are avaliable. If there are no images for Shogi generals, large Wazir and
Ferz ones will do, particularly as this will use every image but King in
large and small form.
	As for the names, I am currently considering using the number of cells:
Mitregi-90 for the basic game, Mitregi-108 for Humpmitregi, Mitregi-120
for a variant adding Knights on 10 files by 12 ranks, and Mitregi-144 for
one adding Knights and Camels on 12².
	It will be a while before I submit the update as I am still waiting to
find out about the backlog in my recent submissions. So if anyone wishes
to reply to my idea, or indeed knows anything about the backlog, please
leave your comments.

One possibility would be to have colourbound pieces starting beside each other. Thus a Mitregi-156 might have White's Bishops on d2/e2, Camels on i2/j2, Mitres on j1/k1, Humps on c1/d1, with Black rotationally symmetric with this. This would restore the Bishop-on-the-left character of Shogi itself. It would also make an interesting comparison with Wildebishogi on my Bishogi page (Shogi with Pawns and symmetric pieces, Bishogi).

Another interesting idea that I have had is an 8x8 variant with just the forward-only pieces, winning by capturing the entire enemy army, no promotion, and pieces that reach the far rank wrapping back round to their back rank. This would have the armies effectively starting back-to-back with only their lack of backward move stopping them being en prise.

I would welcome feedback on both these ideas before I submit them.