Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Bob's Zebras don't fit the theme, but I'm now inspired to create a leaper-heavy game with Knights, Camels, Zebras, and all their compounds with such other pieces as may be needed for adequate mating power.

Some thoughts on the "can mate" property of pieces. Apparently, since K + NW vs. King can force mate, King + X can force mate if X is any of the Harvestman compounds, or presumably where X is the Harvestman itself, though I'm not familiar with mating with NW's and Zillions is not good at it. We know mate can be forced if X is a Cardinal. As has been pointed out, when X is a Gnu, the game is drawn. If X is a Caliph (BC), I assume it is also a draw, as the Caliph is colorbound.

In Chess, a major piece (Queen, Rook) can mate, while a minor piece (Bishop, Knight) can't and this is the definition of major and minor pieces. In Chess, the majors are stronger in terms of overall power as well. This is not necessarily true of variants. It is quite possible for a minor piece to have more overall power than a major piece. Can mate is only a significant part of piece value (the proportion is unknown and may vary).

A thought for research: how much less valuable is a Queen which can't capture a King than a normal Queen? The possibility of King capture is the basis for check and mate, though in Chess and variants using the checkmate rules, the capture is never actually carried out.

For Colorful Osmosis, if my assumptions are correct, the major pieces are Harvestman, Evangelist, Imam, Battlemaster, and Cardinal; while the minor pieces are Bishop, Knight, Camel, Gnu, and Caliph.

Please let me know if any of my assumptions are incorrect.

If the 10x10 doesn't work, try 12x12. You may need to add pieces to fill things out (I'd say just an extra pair of Knights*), but it's a thought.

*My first thought was Zebras, but that idea lasted about a quarter of a second. It'd add another level of complexity that I doubt you'd want, with another bunch of compound pieces -- Okapi, Bison, Kuhani, and whatever you call the Harvestman compound.

I've found a flaw in this design--the opening Camel move to the fourth rank is too disruptive to the enemy development, so as White, Zillions always chooses it. This seems to result in an excess of White wins. A recent series of ten test games yielded 8 wins for White, 1 win for Black, and 1 lack of forces draw. This is not acceptable.

I'm experimenting with a fix: play on a 10x10 board, ten pawns on the third rank, pieces (except Camels) on the second rank as in Grand Chess (with the square next to the King empty), and Camels in the corners.

Initial testing looks good. If more tests show more balanced outcomes, I will update these pages accordingly; if not, I will withdraw the game.

For now, consider this game on hold.

BTW the new setup on the 10x10 has a much more pleasing appearance. The rather ugly Bishop Camel swap on one side of the board is no longer needed to give each player one Bishop and one Camel of each color.

I see that the Alfaerie 1 set for Diagram Designer already has 26 pieces. How would it be possible to add a new piece?

Thanks, Lev for pointing that out. I will edit the page.

I'll see what I can do with the Diagram Designer. I may need to add several images from other Alfaerie sets, Alfaerie 1 doesn't seem to include them.

I see that Bishop/Camel + Harvestman compounds (Evangelist and Imam) are also able to checkmate in K vs K + X endgame. (It includes the King move so can easily do that). OTOH Wildebeest (aka Gnu) is not able to do this.

The Diagram Designer lets you choose which set to use to display pieces with, and it does give you some set options with numerous pieces. So, if you want to use a different piece than the Rook, it will let you. And if you can't find a suitable piece, you might be able to draw one and get it added to the Alfaerie set.

Edited some minor typos.

Would Propagandist be too on the nose?

Perhaps not enough, depending on one's definition of that phrase. Publicist is closer, but not quite there.

Agronomist is (sort of) Gilmanese for the 8:5 leaper (XBetza GXY). Though whether that piece is much use (arguably even in compounds) is a good question

I have my library of fifth-circle leapers (and I've even featured a couple in my Piece of the Day series), but the further out things get the less useful they are -- as you say, even in compounds. I'll tend to ignore anything (even Gilman's) beyond sixth, or any of Gilman's assignments that aren't for square systems.

And yeah the Reapman is probably pretty useless; a one‐square difference from what's already a much less interesting piece than the Boyscout.

The Harvestman also features in Cetina's larger Universal Chess (UC–170–13)

Well, what isn't, that hasn't been invented afterward?

Would Propagandist be too on the nose?

Agronomist is (sort of) Gilmanese for the 8:5 leaper (XBetza GXY). Though whether that piece is much use (arguably even in compounds) is a good question

And yeah the Reapman is probably pretty useless; a one‐square difference from what's already a much less interesting piece than the Boyscout.

The Harvestman also features in Cetina's larger Universal Chess (UC–170–13)

Environmentalist? Climate scientist?

A government official responsible for either agriculture, immigration, or tourism would be what I'm after.

what'd be the secular counterpart?

Environmentalist? Climate scientist?

Thanks for that, Haru! :) I was trying to figure out what the rotary counterpart would be for the Evangelist. I still don't have a good name (what'd be the secular counterpart? Agronomist?), but it's a start.

And thanks for the ID, H.G.! :)

Note that the diagram in the article does show a mirror-symmetric setup rather than a rotational one, in contrast to what the text states. In the Diagram below I followed the text.

I'm no Bn Em but Harvestman rotary counterpart is called Reapman in Man and Beast 13: Straight and Crooked Moving.

That is true. Extra moves do not always make it easier, due to the stalemate concern.

Yes, I think so, the Imam covers a stretch of three adjacent squares (1,2)(1,3)(1,4) and can manœuvre with a Wazir move, this should be sufficient for a checkmate. One has to be careful not to stalemate the lone King, because the Harvestman component covers so many squares.

The WNC is featured as Teutonic Knight in Teutonic Knights Chess.

The Imam should also be able to checkmate. The Checkmating Applet cannot handle lame leaps, but it says WNC can easily force checkmate on 9x9. This is only a small part of what the Imam can do, except that the N move there is the (lame) Mao. But in end-games the lameness almost never matters. The Gnu (NC) indeed cannot force mate, but this is an unlucky coincidence, caused by the King being in the way. Having even a single W move makes all the difference, though.

It is well known that two Camels (or in fact any pair of identical simple leapers) cannot force checkmate. Of course B+N on 9x9 cannot force checkmate if the Bishop is on the wrong shade, as all corners are of the same shade, and mate is only possible in the corner of the shade of the Bishop. Camel + Knight suffers from the same problem.

Gnu should pretty much be able to checkmate in combination with anything. The 3-vs-1 Applet shows it can even do it together with a Camel or Bishop of the wrong shade. If the other piece can cover (say) c1 with its own King on b3, it can keep the bare King at a1 & b1, and the Gnu can manoeuver at leasure to d2 to attack both of these. If the other piece can attack b1, you can trap the bare King likewise by putting the Gnu on d3 to cover c1, and after checking the bare King on b1 with the other piece, move the Gnu to b4 for checkmate. A Gnu is so strong that it can drive the King to a corner by itself.

Since Knight + Wazir can already force mate, Knight + Harvestman should be quite easy. Bishop + WN (as a poor-man's Harvestman) also appears to be won, even for the wrong shade; it appears edge checkmates can be forced in that case.

Hm... what should a rotary counterpart of the Harvestman be: Ferz, followed by Girlscout (aka Crooked Rook)? This is almost the same as a Girlscout lacking the initial Wazir steps and I doubt that this piece was ever used in Chess Variant.

X-Chess by Jeremy Gabriel Good featured the Harvestman among other pieces of Seenschach, but this is the only other game I am aware of.