Comments by jean-louiscazaux

It is interesting to note that a piece named 弩 (Nu) is reported in qiguo xiangqi (seven-player xiangqi), a variant that would have been reported by Sima Guang in the 11th century!

The move was not that of a modern Vao though.

I like it too, very much. I agree with Florin that the text is not well promoting this variant. Maybe someone with better English than me could help Lev in re-phrasing his presentation. That game would deserve it.

@ Zhennan Su: very interesting thank you

The Medusa may also be understood as a jellyfish by some people. In French both Medusa, the Greek monster, and jellyfish are called "méduse". Of course, the name of the animal comes from the mythological name.

For representing that piece in Musketeer Board Painter Tool I use their icon of a jellyfish.

Interesting also to note that Medusa was one of the three Gorgons in the Greek mythology. So, there is a bit of something weird in having both Medusa and Gorgona. I don't know who made those icons looking like targets.

I am not sure that the word "gorgona" exists in English, does it?

There is only 1 game, not 2. I have modified my comment.

(The 2nd game I have removed was in fact that game interrupted by HG's mistake. That log stayed as a drawn after your attempt to restaure it (but it was impossible to re-start it), and for a reason I ignore, it turned as a victory for Paul "on time". As we had re-started this game from the beginning, I have erased that first log.)

So, the suspect game that has been finished "on time" is a game of Macrochess that I would have won against Richard Milner of time, which is strange because we were playing several moves a day.

yes, I would say entirely black for the black one. I think it's better. Or just the small top triangle in the head in white.

"Of course nothing changes. This is an HTML form that calls a PHP script to redraw the board."

@Fergus: I'm not an informatician. I come here to read and play about chess variants not to discuss computer science. I don't know what PHP script is and I don't think it is necessary to know to play Tigrey or Timurid chess.

Today I play with my McBook and what I see is that is has become very slow to display a 10x10 or 12x12 board on my screen.

@Daniel: Biplane and Triplane have the same definition in Greater Tiger Chess.

I suggest you change the name of Aanca to Manticore, or Rhinoceros, but not Aanca to avoid perpetuating this sticking mistake. Aanca is F then R.

"If you're literally reloading the page, that would be a mistake. You should submit the form and load a new page."

I don't see how I can do otherwise. I go to Rendering box, I get a menu. I select CSS instead of Table, then nothing change with the diagram. I see no special button to "submit" or something like that, so I reload and the diagram has still small icons and the rendering is back to Table.

"I just told you in my previous comment"

Where?

"Are you using Alfaerie pieces with the Table rendering method? To stop borders from expanding beyond the space a piece is in, this method will now reduce pieces in size just enough to make room for the borders. For pieces with optimized dimensions, such as Abstract, Magnetic, and Motif, this affects only the largest of pieces. But since Alfaerie pieces have uniform dimensions no matter how big the visible image is, they are all reduced in size. If this makes pieces too small for you, you can switch to the CSS rendering method, which does things in a manner better suited for piece images with uniform dimensions."

Sorry I don't see where in this text what you have changed and why.

The pieces are about 1/3 in L and 1/3 in h compare to one square dimensions. So too small for me but also too small for anyone with a similar mobile I think.

True. But this is really the problem with Alfils. This is the case also in the original shatranj. I agree that a different setup could improve the game play. At the end, it might be an interesting game to look at the interactions between the elementary "atoms".

Surprising that you are satisfied. I see many defects on this image. For instance, the rectangle with different color on the left wing. Or the neck on the right. Or the right breast. Or the bottom base.

Apart from that, seriously, you think this looks like a chess piece?

@Daniel: thank you. Yes it's veryyyyyyy long. I prefer it to Terachess too exactly for the same reasons. You play very well in co-ordinating those different powers.

I'm probably stupid. Nowhere on my screen there is "Appearance controls". I see a box with "Render as". There I change PNG to CSS or Table. And then? I see nowhere "Preview". I see "View", "Print" and "Annotate". In any case, even with CSS or Table, when I scroll the table, the diagram remains the same, I can't see past moves without pressing "view", no interactive moves like for the other games. Maybe it's impossible.

I recognize that my comment was a bit too straight. When I read what you write, I think that we agree on almost everything. I support your view of which pieces should be shown here, for what they represent.

Where we disagree is on the use of these images made by AI. I know you like them, but I really don't. I see no homogeneity among the different ones you put here and also elsewhere. In my opinion, a good design should have a good balance between abstract and figurative. Staunton designs are excellent in this respect. Although, some sets may have Knight's designs which go too far.

The AI is trying to make a nice design of what you ask, plenty of tiny details. And this is what it goes away from what should be. It is not abstract enough and indeed sometimes they look like toys.

I know some chess sets are very figurative, also like toys, and some collectors like that. But this is not what most chess players want. I have not the pretention to be an artist but I really prefer my Lion, Eagle, Camel, Medusa, Cannon, Giraffe, etc.

That being said, this CVP is your website, to you more than to others given the strong involvement you are putting in, so if you like these images, use them after all.