Comments by catugo
This Thread is about games that contain the joker(imitator, jester, fool) piece. The joker piece is here a piece that does not have a move of it's own but borrows the last move of the opponent. It has no other abilities (unlike the one in omega chess), not even double pawn move, en passant or promotion, ability to castle etc. .
The main problem I am facing is that with increased number of piece types (which comes naturally on larger boards) it becomes increasingly powerful. I fear it becomes game breaking. I'm stuck in designing my new games as this piece is also difficult to program (more on this later). Each of the games I am designing has a heavy cavalry piece pair and a light cavalry piece (leapers- their exact abilities are not important now), a bishop pair, a rook pair, a war wagon (as I have renamed the well known falcon), a bent rider, a leaper+slider compound, a queen and of course the royal king. What I have observed by playing against the interactive diagram is that after some pawns and minors are exchanged the joker finds rather easily a central or near central position where it seems almighty. True that the opponent has a joker, too, but it is quite often when one joker paralyzes more pieces than the other. So to me it seems that the joker inserts in the game more a random thing than a good strategy reward. I have to mention that in orthodox chess I have a 1500 rating after the recent increase. Probably stronger players will feel differently. I though of having instead of one all imitating joker to have one that has it's power updated when the enemy moves a light piece and one that has it's power updated when the opponent moves a heavy piece. But this makes a game that already has a steep learning curve into something with an even greater learning curve. I'm writing this in hope for new opinions about including joker in increasingly large games.
On the programming side of things, games that have jokers are more difficult to program. And not because it's move power is difficult to program. I was able to go myself as far, but not further. It is a piece extremely difficult to evaluate. It has been proposed here to aproximate the piece value with the average strength of the enemy pieces. But this does not do it justice. The number of enemy piece types should play a role especially in games where there are many types of piece types like in those I'm designing as mentioned above (riders, leapers, pathers, leapers+riders, bent riders etc.). Moreover chessV does not accept a joker imitating a war wagon (falcon). Some I'm stock only with the interactive diagram which is a poorer AI. I know HG works on something cooler in C++ if I'm not mistaking but this could take many months maybe years.
More I'm thinking of a 10x10 CWDA with jokers. But imitating an opponent's move does not seem like CWDA to me. So I'd go for a transferrer that trasfers the move of a fibnif to a waffle for example. All of these are reasons for why I'm contemplating to take out the joker and replace it with a more normal piece.
But I have reserves to doing that also. First as I have said above I am a merely 1500 chess player. What if introducing the joker is brilliant but I just can't see it. What I find random it is actually strategic for a better player. A NNUE program for example. Also the joker is fun and it offers many tactical possibilities.
For now the best course of action seems to me to make simulations with ChessV without a joker, say jokerless varaints of the variant. That to find out the real piece values when the joker is not involved. An then when HG's more sofisticated program becomes available, try to look at games with joker (never jokers, as many jokers also make each joker more powerful) and see if having a joker makes the games more strategic and tactical, or it makes the game feel more random.
@Christine,
Thanks For including me in this discussion!
Ok, I'll remember that for the future!
I don't know why the Picture does not work! It works for me!
I though at warlock for ZW because it is related to the wizard CF.
Agreed! But I am all for publishing piece values obtained through applying your experimental method. That and other tactical or strategic tips the author has found. For example I have observed that it is wrong to move a joker, in all my apothecary games, if there are pawns still ahead because they can move forward attacking the joker while the poor sucker cannot run, as it imitates a pawn. Conversely if there are no pawns ahead moving the joker to the center can be very fruitful as it can imitate anything making it temporarily the most powerful piece on the board.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Why is that? The falcon is a rook strength piece. With two Manticores there would be three strong pieces and two medium strength pieces! To me having three medium pieces and two strong ones seems a better distribution of strength.
I think a nice feature would be to allow multiple platforms for cannon like pieces. Personally as I don't like the idea of bishops in a Xiangqi or Janggi environments I'd like a pRppcR instead (where pp stands for 2 platforms). Some food for thought.
Actually I expect something along the same lines but better, meaning a stronger engine! I am aware of the fact that it can take many months, though!
Hello HG, A few weeks ago I noticed you contemplated writing a C++ code for the AI of the interactive diagram. Anything from this contemplation?
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
What is scramble?
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
Since this comment is for a page that has not been published yet, you must be signed in to read it.
You have a typo at the beginning of the 3rd paragraph in the rules section. You have written "wite: instead of "white".
You are welcome!
Here is the latest installer version: http://www.chessv.org/. But there are some much newer versions. I'll search tomorrow!
And by the way, has anyone news on Greg?
Once, when writing code for CwDA, Greg Strong has asked the community for an alternative named to fibnif, as he did not like it. I have proposed lancer and donkey while favoriting lancer. He has chosen lancer for chessV2!
Chu shogi, elven chess, atlantean ballroom shatranj.
I think the name for WthenB, in games where the FthenR, is present should be chosen acoordingly. So should, in more fantastic theme, the tandem be named manticore and griffin, or in an animal theme rhino and eagle should work also. Personally I like to keep, for games with less pieces, where you don't run into name exhaust, a medieval theme names for both the WthenB and FthenR. So names like duke, minister or regent come into my mind.
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Forget about running the games on ChessV even without the Joker. ChessV does not do riders bent after the second step either. It seems y it is not supported.