Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
Korean variant: sage moves as zebra. Cannon and arrow must leap, capturing, or not.
I can disagree that Yangqi have 57 opening moves. It have 29 opening moves: this game have perfect simmetry, and each move have another move, wich is equal to it, expect moving general or center pawn straight forward. But second player really have 57 opening moves, unless first player moved general or center pawn straight forward. Same things can be told about Xiangqi.
HP wrote:
'This game counts as a Xiang Qi variant, because it is based on Xiang Qi, and it can be played with the same equipment.' So, you want to say that games, wich adds R+N and B+N compounds on 10x8 or 10x10 are not FIDE chess variants, because they cannot be played with FIDE chess equipment?
No, I did not give necessary conditions for being a Xiang Qi variant. I only gave a sufficient condition, which is being based on Xiang Qi and using the same equipment. Being based on Chess and using the same equipment as Chess is a sufficient condition for being a Chess variant, but it is not a necessary condition. So, games which use R+N and B+N with the Chess pieces on a larger board may still count as Chess variants.
But you are correct to point out that Yang Qi cannot be played with the same equipment as Xiang Qi, because it uses extra Pawns. However, all the equipment to play Yang Qi can be found in two Xiang Qi sets, which is close enough. After all, using exactly the same equipment is not a necessary condition for being a Xiang Qi variant.
'This game counts as a Xiang Qi variant, because it is based on Xiang Qi, and it can be played with the same equipment.' So, you want to say that games, wich adds R+N and B+N compounds on 10x8 or 10x10 are not FIDE chess variants, because they cannot be played with FIDE chess equipment? Your Eurasian chess is perfect, it's idea is to make game, wich have equal from chess and XQ and chess, and this idea is perfectly fulfilled, but Yang-qi is supposed to have more from XQ, but it's much closer to western chess... Also, it cannot be played with XQ equipment, it have more pawns. I can suggest to use only 5 pawns, and, to make possible protecting pawns with other pawns possible, give them non-capturing sideways move (initially, NOT after crossing river). It also will give more XQ feeling. They may be placed on opening positions of XQ pawns, but, i think, better is to put in frontof knights pawns, wich are in front of bishops, as here knights are stronger than cannons, and it's not good if cannons would be able to capture them on first moves...
Game is not bad... But just as a game, because IT'S NOT XIANG-QI VARIANT!! It's just CHESS variant, wich uses ONE piece from xiang-qi and variant of this piece!! If there would'nt be game with same name, this could be called 'Chess with cannons'!!
You may have a narrow conception of what constitutes a Xiang Qi variant, one which I don't share. This game counts as a Xiang Qi variant, because it is based on Xiang Qi, and it can be played with the same equipment. The idea behind this game was not to introduce cannons to Chess but to westernize Chinese Chess.
Game is not bad... But just as a game, because IT'S NOT XIANG-QI VARIANT!! It's just CHESS variant, wich uses ONE piece from xiang-qi and variant of this piece!! If there would'nt be game with same name, this could be called 'Chess with cannons'!!
Recently, through a crossword, I discovered that there is a musical instrument called a Yangqin, a kind of dulcimer. According to the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangqin it has used two different characters for Yang, originally one meaning foreign, and later replace by one meaning acclaimed. Oddly enough the name of this variant works just as well with either of these characters. The 'foreign' sense is obvious - a non-Chinese variant adding in the non-Chinese Bishop. The 'acclaimed' sense is, I would argue, demonstrated by all the positive previous comments from connoisseurs of variants.
The rating is because I am now won over to the Cannon family of pieces, and have now used them in a few variants of my own.
I guess that's true, except that I was unaware of the game mentioned. My QuickPawns are based on Kevin Begley's Quick-Pawns from Mammoth Chess. The main difference is that the unhyphenated kind can capture each other by en passant. BTW, although the rules for his game have been deleted from chessvariants.com, they are still available here: http://web.archive.org/web/20000609140622/http://chessvariants.com/large.dir/contest/mammoth.html Archive.org is part of Big Brother's attempt to keep tabs on all of us by showing the world the things we decided to delete from our webpages. Actually, they provide details on how to opt out of having your webpages archived here: http://www.archive.org/about/exclude.php But if you've since gotten rid of a website, there might be nothing you can do to escape the watching eye of Big Brother.
Although Cannons and pieces derived from them are not really my thing, credit should be given for the idea of combining features of two well-established games. Indeed as I have now used that idea in a different way in a game of my own (http://www.chessvariants.com/xiangqivariants.dir/anglis_qi.html) it would churlish for me not to! Incidentally I note that Yang has now gained a new prominence, as one of the names of China's first astronaut.



25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Merging Chinese chess with Western chess was a very ambitious thing to do (altering two orthodox traditions) but I think you've succeeded! I like how you took the plain round disks and replaced them with chess pieces that are easier to discrimate. Good work on this interesting variant!