The site has moved to a new server, and there are now some issues to fix. Please report anything needing fixing with a comment to the homepage.

The Chess Variant Pages

[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Reverse Order Earlier
Lance. Moves one or more squares straight forward.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Charles Gilman wrote on 2010-06-30 UTC
Stating that it is stronger than the Goldgeneral is a simplification. It gets weaker the further forward it moves. Look at what it is once on the eighth rank. By then promotion is more than justified.

Anonymous wrote on 2010-06-29 UTC
It's very interesting piece. Itself is stronger than gold general, but as it moves only forward, it must promote.

Anonymous wrote on 2010-05-07 UTC
I think, 'lance' is convenient name for Europeans, as symbol wich is
usually used in western sets (long arrow, pointing forward, while symbols
of generals are usually short arrows, pointing in directond, where generals
moves) reminds spear (but i am not sure that it's true). And that's why i
prefer i prefer to call it ragnat chariot.
Nevermind, i wanted to tell one interesting thing: look at this page: -it describes history of Xiang-qi,
but i was interested by this paragrph (citation): 'The eldest undeniable
reference for the Xianqi is the Xuanguai lu (‘Tales of the obscure and
peculiar’) writen by the Tang Minister of State Niu Sengru (779-847), a
collection of tales of the supernatural. One is telling the of  Cen Shun
dreaming of a battle to come (which was supposed to occur in 762 AD.):
'the celestial Horse springs aslant over three, the Commanders go
sideaways and attack on all four sides, the baggage-waggons go straight
forwards and never backwards, the six men in armour (or the men armed with
six weapons) go in file but no backwards... On both sides stuff was
unpacked, stones and arrows flew across.' To make it absolutely clear,
these moves can be deduced from the text, but not with certainty. Since the
source is unique the greatest prudence is recommended. There is just
another mention in poem from Niu's contemporary and friend Bo Juyi
(772-846) which explicitly evoke Soldiers and Charriots.'
-description of baggage-waggons strongly reminds fragnat chariots!

H. G. Muller wrote on 2010-03-27 UTC

I always thought the name Lance was quite an obvious description of what the piece does: you stick it deep into the opponent to do damage.

It is also easy to symbolize. WinBoard uses these symbols for it in Shogi.

Charles Gilman wrote on 2010-03-27 UTC
This piece does indeed have connection with the Rook - it occupies the corners of the board, as the Rook does elsewhere, and both pieces' Shogi names refer to the Rook's origin representing a chariot. Given that link, it is strange that it gets called a Lance. Rooks (in any sense) don't have lances, knights do. I could understand if they'd called the next piece along a Lance - although to avoid confusion I avoid calling any piece Lance.

Anonymous wrote on 2010-03-24 UTC
There are hystory of pieces in other piececlopedia articles! Why there is no hystory here? There at least must be written that lance is related to rook! Or it's wrong? If it's wrong, there must be written that 'some people think think that lance is related to rook but it's wrong' (i read in some articles of hystory of chess that it's related to rook). Also note that lance is wrong name, it's real name is insance chariot, it's called 'lance' in same articles, where Angle walker is called bishop (and it's not bishop at all, just have same moves)!

xxx wrote on 2006-08-15 UTC
Which is better, a lance or a rook that can make side move only?

Jeff Rients wrote on 2004-04-28 UTC
Making the most of bad pieces can be a lot of fun. Anyone can get a lot done with their knight+bishop+rook superpiece. Accomplishing the same task with a lame piece like the lance is much more satisfying.

Higsby the Great wrote on 2004-04-28 UTCGood ★★★★
Well, at least its better then the pawn.

9 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.