Check out Atomic Chess, our featured variant for November, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Shi Ji wrote on Sun, Aug 1, 2010 10:21 AM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
In fact Xiang Qi is too drawish. A Chinese professional player can easily
force a draw playing Red (White). A few years ago The Chinese Xiang Qi
Assosiation (I don't know what exactly the name is in English, just that
kind of organization) even made a controversial rule that a draw equals to
a win of Black. Xiang Qi has too many defending pieces and too much
restrictions on offencing pieces, that's why too many draws.
When I was a child, my grandpa told me that the purpose of Xiang Qi is to
checkmate the opponent not maintain valued pieces. Sacrifices are very
common in Xiang Qi for two reasons:
a)Though the board is larger, it's hard to develop valued pieces in Xiang
Qi. So sacrifices happen to exchange for partial advantages on one side
(left or right) of the board.
b)Players of Xiang Qi like to achieve winning of continuos mates (as VCFs
in Renju). Sacrifices happen when a player can see clearly a win after many
continuos mates.

Edit Form

Comment on the page On Designing Good Chess Variants

Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Avoid Inflammatory Comments
If you are feeling anger, keep it to yourself until you calm down. Avoid insulting, blaming, or attacking someone you are angry with. Focus criticisms on ideas rather than people, and understand that criticisms of your ideas are not personal attacks and do not justify an inflammatory response.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.