Comments by JaredMcComb

If I may clarify Larry Smith's clarification: When one piece captures 
another, the capturing piece gets all the captured piece's moves, except 
for those it already had, which it loses instead.  It's a bit of 
a 'toggle' if you will.

I tried to say that almost immediately after this game was posted but for 
some reason the comment system decided it hated me.

It's too expensive for me too -- although my brother and I
would love to get into it.  I guess we'll have to wait for a video game
release.  ;)

'Gary, I believe that Manabu Terao and Manabu Terao are two different
people as much as I believe that Gus Duniho and Fergus Duniho are two
different people.'

No offense, but you could have saved some time and just said that in the
first place.  ;)

No offense, but I'd prefer that the ZRF for this game reflect the rules
correctly.  Not being very adept at programming myself, would you mind
doing this 'hacking' and updating the file accordingly?

Also, does this require Zillions 2.0 to work properly?  I haven't got
that so I won't be able to play this myself if it does.

Whoops, I didn't think that I shouldn't nominate it because I made the
page.  I thought that I could do so because I didn't invent the game.

As for its popularity, it was made into a Super Famicom (Japanese SNES)
game (not many CVs are besides Chess and Shogi), although the rest of your
argument sort of makes this a moot point.

So it looks like Looney Labs is discontinuing the single-color stashes in
favor of their new 'Treehouse' system.  Single-color stashes will still
be available in their online store, while supplies last - but they do have
Cyan available.

Linkage: http://www.looneylabs.com/whybuy/treehouse.html

I've just received a custom Omega chessboard which I ordered awhile back. 
It is made of quarter-inch plywood, laser-etched and stained.  I hope to
post some pictures soon, especially if there is any interest.  ;)

Poor in part to counteract the excellent, but mostly because that is my
opinion.

The game is needlessly complicated and too confusing to learn, and in
addition, the page and diagram are just plain ugly.  And I believe Andy is
correct in saying that Nicholls' arguments are both condescending and
outrageous, although I'm not sure that the LoTR series qualifies as
'second-rate.'  (I really need to go read 'em...)

At the community college that I graduated from, there was a student
association called 'Writers' Guild,' where students and faculty could
bring things that they had written and get opinions on them.  The one
major rule there was, after reading something you wrote, you couldn't
defend it while other people critiqued - and it WORKED.  I believe that
this community could almost definitely improve if people here acted by
this rule for a while after their articles are posted.

There is a typo in the diagram - one player has no Silver - and by 'W'
you mean Lance, right?

Haven't tried it yet but it seems that the large number of long-range
pieces will overpower the game more than in Yonin Shogi.  Plus it doesn't
have the rules Yonin does about handling check and mate, which IMO is the
best way to do it - but on the other hand, entirely removing the pieces of
a defeated player from play seems like it might make the endgame more
interesting and help control the large number of long-range pieces. 
(Question: are the mated player's in-hand pieces also retired from play?)