Life In 19x19

Hi Anzu,

I like the simplified char. set in post 23,
especially on an iPhone 4S screen.
( And I can read all the Shogi kanjis no problem. )

CutFirstThinkLater wrote:As someone who hasn't grown up with any of these four but tried them all (I grew up playing Janggi) I guess I can cast a neutral vote, and to me it's definitely Shogi. Because of the 'capture and drop anywhere' rule its complexity level is almost on par with Go and far more dynamic than any other variant of its kind. No wonder it's been held in nearly the same high esteem as Go in Japan - a privilege its cousins in China and Korea couldn't enjoy.

Shogi is certainly beautiful, its status is high. However, it should be noted that the status of xiangqi and janggi is quite different in Korea and China. For last year top-earning professionals of Go and xiangqi in China were very close. In Korea, there are still a huge difference.

While the number of board positions is less than Go, wouldn't the number of possible game (records) be larger that Go, even considering various repetition rules for Shogi?

LifeIn9x9 wrote:While the number of board positions is less than Go, wouldn't the number of possible game (records) be larger that Go, even considering various repetition rules for Shogi?

There are more then 500 theoretically possible moves in the shogi endgame from the one position. Branching in the shogi endgame definitely more then branching of any stage of Go.

I would love to learn Shogi, but only if I had several people in the area actually interested in playing it. From what I have read it is a fascinating game. At our small GO club we have a box of GO sets in there. If one looks there is also a tournament Chess set and an Elephant/Chinese chess set there also. I learned Chinese Chess years ago when I visited Taiwan as a teenager and bought a set. But the only place I can play if I choose is online. So like I always say GO is the best, but one can enjoy any of the other great fighting games, and for a change they are definitely very fun.

Grab the app "LionWars" for a clever introduction to the game, simplified and redesigned for kids. The app has enough English that you can play it online and learn some of the interesting combinations that dropping can bring to the game.

We rightly noted the dignity of Shogi in this topic, but some players have asked any opinion about xiangqi. Why this game is so popular, even the most popular in the world. Obviously not only because China is overpopulated. For example, xiangqi is the game number one in Vietnam, much more popular then European chess, despite the fact that the Sports Committee of Vietnam is actively developing chess. There are really many things in xiangqi that do not exist in chess. And it's not just a Cannon.

There are two important concepts in xiangqi - of emptiness and blockade. 32 pieces (like in chess) fighting on the board, consisting of 90 points. Сoefficient of emptiness in xiangqi much higher than in chess and in shogi. In the absence of pawn chains, it enables unhindered invasion to the opponent's camp (already at the first move, if you want!). In shogi for such invasion there is dropping of pieces.
The second is blockade. In European chess only pawn can be blocked by other pawn or other piece. Thats why there are closed positions there. In shogi no one piece can be blocked so easily. But in xiangqi the concept of blockade is total. And this is the basis of the pieces` interaction on the xiangqi board. Elefant, Cannon and Knight can be blocked by any piece of opponent. Moreover Knight can be blocked by Knight and Cannon can be blocked by Cannon. Usually such type of encounter leads to pieces exchange in chess. But not in xiangqi. There is a big difference with blockade in two games: chess Pawn can be blocked only tightly, while xiangqi `pieces usually have 4 directions and its difficult to block it completely. Thats why xiangqi is generally more dynamic. At last but not at least, there is "edge blockade" in xiangqi and it happens much more often then in any other game. Because Advisors have only 5 points to move and 4 points from these are corner! Elefants have 7 points and 6 points from these are edge! King blocked in palace as well. The third blockade` premise is a very crowded Palace. Advisors and King usually limit each other.

Cannon in xiangqi - truly an amazing piece. For easy travel, it needs empty space, but for capture it needs a crowded line. That is why it is so organically fit into the overall picture of the game.

Pieces of xiangqi are very different, very unusual and indeed play on the different boards (like dark and light bishops in chess). When these parallel worlds come together, there is a very interesting systemic effect. Perhaps the popularity of the game can be explained by the surprise and the beauty of this effect.

How many moves does an average game of Shogi consist of? And are we talking "Chess moves" or "Go moves"? They are different.

Joelnelsonb wrote:How many moves does an average game of Shogi consist of? And are we talking "Chess moves" or "Go moves"? They are different.

Somewhere in one and a half times longer than an average game of chess.

Xiangqi seems like a good casual chess game. The perks of a slower pace and limited movement make it a nice alternative to western chess while still being familiar enough (no capture mechanic like in shogi). I can see why experienced strategy players would prefer the other games though. It does come off as a sort of reigned-in western chess, even with the off-the-wall piece that is the cannon.

Xiangqi seems like a good casual chess game. The perks of a slower pace and limited movement... to western chess...

Seems the other way around ? Each of the 16 xiangqi pieces is free to move from the start,
unlike in chess where 6 pieces (of one color) are blocked.

Wikipedia says xiangqi is slightly more complex.

Amateurs and pros may have different perspectives on the casualness.

moyoaji wrote:♞ ♙ ♚

moyoaji, how to type the chess characters ?

I think the fact that Elephants can't cross rivers, Horse can't leap over pieces and the Advisors (and General) having such limited movement options make the game quite a bit slower and less brutal than western chess. But again, it may be me speaking as a beginner in both games.

EdLee wrote:moyoaji, how to type the chess characters ?

Hello Ed! It's been a while.

I went to a unicode character site that lists them all and searched for "chess." http://unicode-table.com is an example. Then it's just copy and paste: ♕

Deglet_Nour wrote:I think the fact that Elephants can't cross rivers, Horse can't leap over pieces and the Advisors (and General) having such limited movement options make the game quite a bit slower and less brutal than western chess. But again, it may be me speaking as a beginner in both games.

I've played some who are more experienced. It makes a world of difference. The game tends to be faster paced than Western chess once you know what you are doing. There isn't as much of a wind-up in the opening. Yes, pieces get positioned, but not to the extent that they do in Western chess. Without pawns in the way, pieces can quickly become powerful. The cannons can be surprisingly brutal if you aren't careful.

I'm surprised that Xiangqi would have a higher game complexity than Western chess, though, considering it has fewer pieces and the pieces do fewer things. Pawns can't promote to other pieces. Knights are more limited. As you said, there are pieces which cannot leave one half of the board. However, that really only increases the State-space Complexity, which is indeed higher for Western chess. The Xiangqi board is larger and it has some additional rules that make the stategy more involved (kings can never face across the board, for example).

Compared to go, however, all versions of chess are effectively the same. Go is so many orders of magnitude more complex that it only makes sense to compare it with chess games because those already are hard for us humans to wrap our heads around. From a distance, both look to be the same size, but chess is a big rock several meters away, while go is a mountain a kilometer off. And even those farthest up the mountain have hardly left its base...

moyoaji wrote: ...

Compared to go, however, all versions of chess are effectively the same. Go is so many orders of magnitude more complex that it only makes sense to compare it with chess games because those already are hard for us humans to wrap our heads around. From a distance, both look to be the same size, but chess is a big rock several meters away, while go is a mountain a kilometer off. And even those farthest up the mountain have hardly left its base...

Heard this so many times. Should have gotten used to it by now, but I never seem to. "Go is so much better, for it is so much more complex etc" Oh please.