Massive new varaint

Full working game played through winboard.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/jxh8cjxmz3gbbpm/6+clan+chess.zip

                           The six clans

The prince, princess, & emperor has special properties. Which are not enforced by Winboard. So these are player enforced. You can take back a move in winboard, if you mess up enforcing a rule.

The princess can not be taken by any female royal piece.(queen, princess, dutchess, fool, regent, wizard).

The prince can not be taken by any male royal piece.(king, prince, duke, lord[lion], emperor, unicorn)

The emperor can not capture any non-royal piece. Can only capture royal pieces. Can be taken by any normal piece. Can not be taken be any royal pieces.

There are four kings. It is like spartan chess. If you put a king in check it does not matter. If there are extra left. Yet if you put all kings alive in check. They most move one out of check. You can take the extra kings like any other piece in the game. Till there is only one left. Then it is just like normal chess. So check only means something with extra kings, if the one in check does not mind losing his extra king. You can also checkmate every king alive to win. That would be the hardest way to win.

Not counting the pawn class

On each side of the board are 24 leapers(20non/4royal [14types]) and 24 sliders(16non/8royal [16types]).

7 color bound types, 1 is royal, 1 can change when it captures.

5 change color each move, 1 is royal

Full working game played through winboard.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/jxh8cjxmz3gbbpm/6+clan+chess.zip

right-click and view image. To see easier. Names inspiration came from here if interested.  

http://www.lscacamp.org/portals/0/medieval%20people.pdf

Might add the smaller games to the file too.(5 clan, 4clan & 3 clan war) If people desire so. All use the same board and plaement. I just blacked out tiles. I'll post the main one for compairing.

Seven kings? How easy is it to trap all of them?

EDIT: Removed /Added up above.

I like that one. Is this the final form? It might be interesting to create a series of progressively larger games, beginning with a 6x6 board and culminating with the 16x16. Each game could introduce a new set of pieces. The whole series could then be played consecutively, and the players could keep score to determine a winner.

A series of progressively larger versions would indeed be nice. I have studied some large to very large Shogi variants, and concluded that these are very interesting games. But because people get intimidated by the large size, they are hardly ever played. So I also tried to offer a progression there, by designing intermediate variants. E.g. Chess -> Mighty-Lion Chess (8x8) -> Elven Chess (10x10) -> Elven Shogi (10x10) -> Chu Shogi (12x12). And from there on Chu Shogi -> Cashew Shogi (13x13) -> Dai Dai Shogi (17x17) and Chu Shogi -> Macadamia Shogi (13x13) -> Maka Dai Dai Shogi (19x19).

The largest game is not necessarily the best. Chu Shogi (12x12) historically developed by shrinking Dai Shogi (15x15), by eliminating the weakest, most boring pieces. (Similar to how modern Chess was derived from Courier Chess (12x8) by eliminating the original Shatranj Elephant and General.) By this it became a much better game. So I tried to do the same for (Maka) Dai Dai Shogi.

The problem with these big games is that, when they are not carefully designed, it takes forever to play them. And the end-game phase can be very boring, as strong pieces tend to be traded rather quickly, so that you are left with large armies of weak pieces. In the large Shogi variants this problem is solved by having immensely powerful pieces in them (which can massacre weak pieces at high rate), which are furthermore protected from trading in some way. E.g. in Chu Shogi there are rules to severely hinder Lion trading. In Maka Dai Dai Shogi there are two 'Lion-class' pieces (which multi-capture in different ways), plus even stronger pieces that combine the moves of these two with that of a Queen. And the latter are 'contageous', i.e. a piece that captures them becomes one, so that they virtually never disappear from the game.

that sounds interesting. The dutchess and duke are backwards, on the bottom row. Unlike every other royal. I forgot to fix that. Yet aside form that. Yep I like it.
I have figured out how to make every piece move. How I want them to move. I made everything, for the most part, as easy to learn. As I could for that many pieces. Have a lot of color bound pieces. Plus all my graphics. As well as every mod on winboard I wanted. Just not sure if everyone can fit a 16 tall board on there screen.

My 2010i 20" fits up to 18 tiles tall. Plus the stuff above the board. My 1080i 60" fits the same  as well. They run a 1500x900 resolution. Yet both my 30" are at 1360x768 resolution and fit only 15 tiles up.

So I must run both 30" screens, on dual screen, on my video card. So I must place half the bottom and top row off screen. Then have the top board options on a differnt 30". Plus the other half of the top row, but I ignore that. So that is sort of lame. Yet the 30" are the ones hooked to the PC currently. So that is how I do it.

So not changing anything. Not making much more for a little bit. Trying to get other things done. I do like your idea of create a series of progressively larger games, beginning with a 6x6 board and culminating with the 16x16. 6x6 is a little small but might work with the right pieces.

I don't want to make them tho. Making six 8x8 with each of the 6 sets could be nice. Plus fast and easy to make. You just need to mod the pawn class's first move distance & the castling distance to work with each different layout.

Yep, playing all the different variants you made HGMuller. Made me love how the lion moves as a double king move. I also like it's no trade rule being enforced. The 'contageous' ones sound interesting. If that don't end up getting confusing. I'll have to look for a engine to play one of those variants somehow.

I'll upload this game as a file like the rest. I'll edit it in to the top post. Everything is the same. I'll just fix the dutch and dutchess being backwards z' & y'.

*sighs*

What are you sighing about battlechess? I know, I know you liked the old pieces I changed more. Right? Did you try the long range leapers yet or the game? Play me! plz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMJ2UpNcyzo

I prefer to set a 99 second move timer. Tho most that play chess want far longer. I feel 30 sec. is all one should get. That way it is over in well under an hour. Yet if you take 2 -3 minutes a move. You can look at about 5 hours, I would guess. Based on my other games I've made. I would say the average game is 150-250 moves. It all really depends how you play. As well as what pieces you focus on using.

Playing Blitz on regular FIDE will probably take about that long if the players haven't mastered the pieces.

Likewise for these variants.

You'd be amazed how fast you learn them once you use them. All legal moves are both shown and enforced by winboard. Don't hurt to give it a try.

So Battlechess are you going to play me or not?

Not fully sure what you mean by "corresondence". Asuming notation. We can play several ways. Some easier than others, but no we do not need to play a whole game at once.

We can play through texting notation commands. Then just moving the pieces to match.(really do not want to do that way, but I guess I will). Winboard will show the move notation as well as let you move be typing it in. So it will not be too much a hassle.

We can use a form of free cam chat. Example PS3, skype, ect, or more or less anything you can come up with, works for me.

We can play through winboad's oline match making. Then save the game and come back, or just leave it running in the back ground. Winboad's oline match making is by far the easiest. Just the sever HGMuller set up is not working at the moment. So untill it is fixed, that is not an option.

I would play a correspondence game with whoever wants to. It's much easier to make a few moves a day, than to dedicate several hours at once for a full game.

Did you say a few moves a day?! How long should it take to make a move.....? I'm ok with correspondence. Yet I'll veiw the game as a chore and not fun. Not even a game no more. Just a boring puzzle, at a few moves per day. If waiting 5min+ per move even more so.

Maybe a few dozen moves a day. I normaly figured out my move in the time it took the other player to figure out his, because they take too long, as it is. I just need the time to see how their last move affects my plans. Only while under attack do I tend to need extra time than that.

So I'll do correspondence. Yet I don't want to get so bored I can't look at the screen any more. After waiting 5 min., for someone to move, over and over again ether. I'll start just making dumb moves because I'll lose intrest in even bothering to play. If I spend five times a much time watching paint dry than I do planing or playing the game. Because I'm waiting. It is no longer a game at that point. Just a meaningless challage or puzzle, that achives nothing. I want to play for entertainment. Not to kill time. All these pieces are here to make people not play it like chess. Overthinking every move. Because over planing ahead outside of openings does not help much with this many pieces. Because there are too many varibles. I did this so I did not have to wait so long for people to move. The by far number one reason  I HATE FIDE Chess.

So to sum up. Yes I'll do it, if done in a steady moving fashion, during the time we are playing.

I say, Ace's earlier versions were at least easier to learn and remember than this ^^: there were a lot less pieces, even if there were more pieces than FIDE, with more complex rules of movement and power.

I think he should have not been so quick to dispose of those earlier ones; were it not for his drive to 'crush the threat of competition' (me); which was one of the main reasons why these massive variants were born; even if Ace here wouldn't admit to it. 

Impressively innovative (to me) as he is.

That aside, Ace, I haven't learned/memorized all these new pieces yet. Give me time, and we will.

I'm sooo confused how you think I see you as competiton.....make me laugh I must say. You think the strangest things sometimes. I do not care if you make games. I do not care if you use the pieces I made, or even the ones I have done any with. Several of them if not most, are most likely in some variant before mine. I'm not affended if I inspired you. That's a good thing. The things that go through your head.
The old pieces were made based on winboard limitations. Which for the most part, I no longer have. I can make most anything I ever wanted.  Minus a few rules being enforced. I did want a bigger board. Yet I just could not come up with a good layout for anything wider. Plus can not go taller or it won't fit on the screen.

The other reason I made the rest was. Before I had it broken into 5 classes. rook like, knight like, bishop like, extra leaper class. Plus royals too. It was a pain to make my real board with sets that needed the  extra types. So I decided I was going to make it just the 3 classes, plus royal. So I could use a whole set for each 'clan'. Given what I had. I had to do at least 6 sets. To make the pieces I had fit in. So then I just made the others to finish each set. While making sure the leapers to sliders where even in number. The whole reason the dropped, extra leaper, class was made. That way making the real set is far easier. Plus knowing what piece is what is easier too. I think not have the extra class makes it look better too. Those are the main reasons I made this so big. That and like I said prior. Adding in so my variables makes thinking ahead more than 3 moves. Almost a waste of time because you can't control a players moves as easy as you can in chess. So at least was the hope. I want to play someone who takes 30-60 sec. on average to make a move. Think fast or learn to think fast from learning from mistakes. Tho I am normaly not lucky enough to see this. I did hope the complexity would kill opening theory creation & the planing 5-7 moves ahead.

I could try to make smaller graphics to play a smaller screen display. Yet I can not seem to draw them any smaller, or shirk them with any program. Without destroying what they look like. Wish it just shunk the display like I do internet browser pages.

Yes, now you will understand why I provided only 3 board sizes with unorthodox pieces in WinBoard. Basically you will have to redraw them by hand to get them in an acceptable quality at other sizes.

XBoard does not suffer from this: it uses SVG images for the pieces, which are scalable to any size.

I don't know if this is helpful, but I do have a set of the XBoard pieces rendered as 33x33 on-line, for my interactive diagrams. They are at http://hgm.nubati.net/rules/sym. I did not add the pieces there yet that I plan to use in future XBoard editions, though. Those can be found in http://hgm.nubati.net/variants/chu_picto, under weird names (adapted to the large shogi variants). They are all PNG, however, with transparent background. So to use them in WinBoard you would have to convert them to .bmp with white background, and provide a separate 'transparency mask' (the 'w' bitmap).

I'll check it out. The second link does not work, by the way.

I don't understand why winboard would not use SVG too. Was that change needed to port it to windows?