[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Sissa. Variant on 9 by 9 board with Sissa's. (9x9, Cells: 81) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Of course Sissa has two pathways to each square on any rectangular board, and either or both may be blocked. 225- and 315-degree angles throw one for a second, but Sissa is a two-path piece, like Eric Greenwood's Cavalier and Duke (both used before in Pritchard ECV games) and like Betza's Rose. I guess 'multiple-path' applies to two possibilities.
Article does not discuss multiple pathways. In fact, Sissa moves to squares of Rook plus those of Nightrider. What is name, as 'Unicorn' is B + NN? However, Sissa does not leap like NN or slide like Rook. Actually it moves to each 'N-Rider square' by two unique paths and 'Rook square' by four(4) routes. Four pathways may be cut to two only by proximity to edge. Still, intervening pieces may reduce any 4-fold way to 3-, 2-, or one, or prohibit move altogether; and any 2-fold way to 1 or 0. More interesting innovation than most CV games that come from new combinations or small change of old elements.
In second drawing above, Sissa at c3 captures Queen at e7 by its 'modified Nightrider route' c3-d4-e5-e6-e7. The other pathway c3-c4-c5-e6-d7 is blocked by Rook at c5, but for two-fold-pathway square, one path is sufficient to complete move (and capture). Sissa goes to N-Rider squares by two-fold way, and Rook squares by four-fold way. Also making same distinction is the angled change of direction. When it turns 45 degrees, Sissa goes to N-Rider square; when 135 degrees, Rook square. It is not necessary, as in article, to think in terms of 225- or 315-degree changes of direction--a '315 turn' is just a 45-degree one the other way for Chess purposes.
'9x9 Blockbusters'. Who know what it is? Put a 'CV' (chess variate) on 9x9, and most of the time it turns out very good or excellent. The only other category that holds for seems to be handful of particular human inventors -- to be named later. Who characteristically has > 10 CVs and > 50% Excellent? Only few, and we shall go out on our proverbial limb as usual, find them, and name them. Part of the reason for 9x9-types' inherent excellence has to be that Shogi amalgums -- chiefly standard Shogi -- on 9x9 are so poorly conceived. Certainly representing excellent culturally, Shogi nevertheless has been found mostly bad for play to most clubbers, worse than also-slow-paced Shatranj. Casual players in the western world find Shogi pieces, moreover, arbitrary and drops distracting. (At least Shatranj had coherence for its time.) Anyway, here is another fine, because original, '9x9', Sissa, recreating as it does ten years ago multi-path Sissa, after Coherent months earlier, and explaining it well enough in this article. The era was short-lived, 1995 - 2003 (when Ralph Betza left) that gave CVs spontaneneous inventiveness, with none of today's ego-driven ''new'' (and not so new (and not new at all)) combinations of elements and, worse, rating of others' CVs not very analytically, instead even with self-described vengeance aforethought. In other words, the modern ethos within CVPage includes that if someone criticizes one's CV, it is taken personally and calls for ''balancing the equation'' by rating the evaluaters' CVs or articles low, regardless of actual merit. Most of newer prolificists adhere to their such principle of ''vengeance rating.'' What a downturn from days of Ralph Betza's mixture of dry wit and informed judgment.
Sissa is multi-path piece, following the new piece category ''multi-path,'' on par with Leaper and Rider. My ''Multi-path Chess Pieces'' is 2004 Copyright. Slider is about equivalent to Rider in usage. The three main variant-piece categories would be Multi-path, Leaper, and Rider. There are orders of magnitude more possibilites for Multi-path than either Leaper or Rider. Long-range leapers are fairly worthless, and useful leaper pieces only number five: Alfil, Dabbabah, Knight, Camel, and Zebra. The three categories are the most frequently occurring, simply because of repeated standards Knight, and Bishop, and Rook. Other rarer categories are Hoppers(Cannon, Grasshopper) and Bifurcation pieces having two diverging pathways after an initial direction. Hoppers and Bifurcation have many more possibilities than Leapers, the smallest category. Now particular Sissa is multi-path to two types of squares. Sissa moves to each Rook square by four pathways. We say Sissa has four-fold way to Rook's every square and then define them. Sissa's to Rook(0,2) are from c1: c1-b1-a1-b2-c3, c1-b2-a3-b3-c3, c1-d1-e1-d2-c3, and c1-d2-e3-d3-c3. Regular 'c1-c2-c3' is not among them, so Sissa is not ''lame Rook,'' that could be blocked altogether at b2. CVPage Glossary has new term sounding-derogatory ''lame'' only applying to radial pieces, i.e., those in Queen's eight directions. Sissa's other squares reachable are traditional Nightrider squares. They are two-path not four-path, as for example, c1-d2-d3 and c1-c2-d3 either to the first NN arrival square. Sissa has two pathways to all Nightrider arrival squares; and that redounds to Sissa's benefit over Nightrider according to position. Sometimes player prefers NN, sometimes Sissa. Nightrider may be blocked from reaching (2,4) and Sissa not blocked, regardless that NN derives from ''leaper''(Knight) and Sissa does not.
H. G. Muller wrote on Sat, Sep 20, 2008 08:49 PM UTC:I don't see multi-path as an alternative to leaper / slide / hopper. Multi-path sliders aso exist, such as the Crooked Bishop. I aways thought 'lame' was a pretty accurate description for pieces that do not leap well. The name for any handicap is bound to be derogatory, as no one like to be handicapped. But being subject to blocking is definitely not a positive trait, the piece vaue suffers greatly by this. The Mao is worth only half a Knight. We could also call lame leapers 'creepers', referring to a mode of locomotion in tight contact with the ground, and thus easily obstructed. Multi-path is basically a fractional form of lameness, where multiple quares have to be occupied to block a move, while multiple lameness occurs when occupancy of one square can block several moves. (Such as in the Mao, which could be called doubly lame.)
H.G. Muller in the last comment here a year ago says, ''Multi-path sliders also exist.'' All multipath pieces are sliders of course. Mere one-way slider is subset of multi-path to the self-same squares. Sliding means they can be blocked, but maybe not every pathway is blocked. They slide to a target square by at least two ways. If certain commenters would read Gilman carefully, they would find Rook is the very first piece defined in M&B1 by Gilman. Rook the first piece of Gilman's 800-1000 piece-types, over half his own but over 300 by other minds. Sissa goes to every Rook square too, Sissa by any of four pathways. Betza's Crooked Bishop goes to half the Rook squares. There are theoretically infinite combinations of ways, on large enough boards, to get precisely to Rook's squares (0,1)(0,2)(0,3).... Only one of them is the straight and orthogonal usual one. Why just Rook? Only for small F.I.D.E. types.
Sissa is twenty years old this month. Sissa reaches by two different pathways each Rook square and each Nightrider square. The slides are its own, unlike those of regular R and regular NN.
Kevin is pointing out currently that Gabriel Maura's Modern Chess allows the Bishops both to stay on same color binding. Sissa here also 9x9 requires one Bishop only per color and the other opposite after each has moved. Still a third way to keep symmetrical starting placement, 81 spaces again, and unique handling of paired Bishops is found in George Dekle's Chesquerque. There the Bishops always have wazir-step conversion option as a turn. So, Chesquerque Bishops late in the game can "re-double up" on the same half ( +/- 0.5 ) of the squares -- powerful tool.
Jim Aiken's Double Diamond ( 9x9, 72 squares ) has same anytime one orthogonal.
Another and earlier one Chancellor Chess (9x9) settled on unsymmetrical initial array, so Bishops alway on their own 40/41 "half." Likewise Gilman goes for off-center positioned Bishops for full square coverage in things like Bachelor Kamil ( 9x9 ).
9 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.