[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
The more i've looked at this game, the more i like it. I think it is an interesting idea, adding the elements of a pawn to the bishop and knight. One thing is that the new pieces are very easy to grasp and therefore very playable, they mix with the normal pieces very well, and the best thing about them is, they both are less powerful than the rook. Nice!! Hawk: Moves like a bishop or moves 1 square vertically forward. It also has 2 non-capture moves, 1 square vertically backwards or a 2 square vertically forward leap. Elephant: Moves like a knight or has a capture only move, 1 square diagonally forward. It also has a non-capture move, being able to slide 1-3 squares vertically forward. Zillions rates the Hawk more powerful than the Elephant. The Hawk is of course not colorbound. I like the Elephant's capture only move 1 square diagonally forward. The knight, when added with extra power, is often too overbearing, but here, in this game, it is not. Nice idea also giving the knight the 3,1 option with it's very first move, good on the 10x10.
In that case I suggest that an editor intervene and strip out all the ratings to restore the unrated status that the variant should have in the absence of non-inventor ratings.
The story is this. I live in Britain and have never in my life been respected to my face for my creativity of any kind. I write poetry and music about world peace and inter-religious cooperation, harmony, love and kindness - yet I am actually a victim of hit and runs and mental harassment by higher 'sectors' whereby even my free-law provided solicitor is corrupt. My father has even asked me like some half-zonked zombie why I want visitors to my website and still hasn't read any of my books. My only true friend in life still cannot find a single day to travel 5 miles down the road to visit me. Needless to say I don't intend to live here for much longer.
Anyway, that aside since I am dealing with that via my own sensible and legal procedure.
So I am grateful for your positive comments and I too apologise if I have upset any innocent feelings caught up in the mess. But due to my situation and stress levels I do not wish to continue this discussion nor do I intend to actively partake in many collaborative intellectual discussions over the internet until I find and settle down amongst a friendly society that understand moral respect.
Have fun playing Chess.
Anyway, that aside since I am dealing with that via my own sensible and legal procedure.
So I am grateful for your positive comments and I too apologise if I have upset any innocent feelings caught up in the mess. But due to my situation and stress levels I do not wish to continue this discussion nor do I intend to actively partake in many collaborative intellectual discussions over the internet until I find and settle down amongst a friendly society that understand moral respect.
Have fun playing Chess.
Wow, you rock. Look, i'm sorry if maybe i upset you when all i had to say when i first posted was that you rated your own game. I was just surprised that you did that. But i was going to follow up with my thoughts on your game. i'm always interested in new pieces, and i like the new pieces because i also think the rook/knight and bishop/knight compounds are too strong. Your pieces are not over-powering, so they go nicely with the other normal pieces. Anyway, i'm sorry if i upset you.
From my observations, all Chess Variant inventors seem to want is to rule the world with their pedantic *superior* intellect and have little respect or even expectation of other's intellect or philosophy. In my opinion you should read the variant, understand its philosophical meaning and then similarly rate it as excellent. Seriously, I couldn't care less.
I don't give a pedantic toss. Ban me if you want.
The point is, rating is supposed to be a way of expressing an opinion of someone else's variant. Rating your own variant is seen as bad form. The right thing to do now would be to edit your own comments on this page, remove the ratings, post a new comment - without a rating from the start - stating that you have done so to make sense of previous comments, and then wait for others to rate your variant.
'Are you expecting a response to your comment?' No, i wasn't expecting a response, but i see you gave me one. I also see you rated your game a 2nd time, lol, and i'm not expecting a response to that either. Thanks, and good luck with your game.
Very bad form, Simon, and somewhat rude.
you rated your own game 'excellent' ...
You can play Jeppseirawan via correspondence here... www.withoutcapricorns.net/forum
Rules have been updated with better clarification and downloadable PDF. Thanks and regards.
14 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
However, that said, the Elephant is very handy in defensive positions. It is often advisable to keep him back until the middle-to-end game, but having him sit by your castled King nearby is often useful.
That said I wouldn't say the Hawk is terribly more powerful than the Elephant since the Elephant can similarly deliver some 'locks, slots & illusions' of its own, dependent on the position.
But it would be interesting to know the exact mathematical difference between the two.