(loss-condition (White Black) (pieces-remaining 1) ) ; This 'bare king rule' creates problems for Zillions in Shatranj and other chess games. Here is an example with 5 pieces set up on an empty board:
VariantName=Shatranj (White Shah c1) (White Rukh b2) (White Baidaq h2) (Black Shah a1) (Black Rukh b8)
1. Shah c1 - c2 [a deliberate blunder in order to test Zillions]
1. Rukh b8 - c8
2. Shah c2 - b3
2. Rukh c8 - b8
3. Shah b3 - c2
3. Rukh b8 - c8
Apparently Zillions was worried about the sequence 1... Rukh x Rukh check 2. King x Rukh 'bare king victory'. I have not seen Zillions actually play an illegal move, but this example does show Zillions failing to win a game because it reacts to the apparent threat of a future illegal move. Another Problem: every Shatranj related ZRF that I have tested will record a 'bare king victory' without granting the player the opportunity for a final move resulting in a 'two bare kings draw'.
(loss-condition (White Black) (pieces-remaining 1) ) ; This 'bare king rule' creates problems for Zillions in Shatranj and other chess games. Here is an example with 5 pieces set up on an empty board:
VariantName=Shatranj (White Shah c1) (White Rukh b2) (White Baidaq h2) (Black Shah a1) (Black Rukh b8)
Apparently Zillions was worried about the sequence 1... Rukh x Rukh check 2. King x Rukh 'bare king victory'. I have not seen Zillions actually play an illegal move, but this example does show Zillions failing to win a game because it reacts to the apparent threat of a future illegal move. Another Problem: every Shatranj related ZRF that I have tested will record a 'bare king victory' without granting the player the opportunity for a final move resulting in a 'two bare kings draw'.