kleineme: Correct!

DragonKing: That's a question which has to be answered by Fencer. Such a feature certainly would be desirable but the rules, especially for perpetual chasing, can be quite tricky. Anyway I don't think that it's an urgent matter on a turnbased site because first you can inform your opponent about the rules, and if that doesn't help then you can always message Fencer and ask him to take measures. That is if you know the rules ;) If you don't and you agree to a draw because you think the same rules as in western chess apply then it's too late ;)

kleineme: Is it possible to change the software program so that perpetual check and perpetual chase would not be allowed? It would certainly improve the program and make for a better playing experience for everyone.

Hi,

seeing that there are still draws by perpetual check, recently in these two games:

http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=1160405
http://brainking.com/en/ArchivedGame?g=1049399

I think it makes sense to repeat an important rule: Contrary to western chess perpetual check is not allowed in chinese chess, as it is explained under "Other important rules" on the rules page: http://brainking.com/en/GameRules?tp=68

I want to get better in Chinese Chess
is there anyone,who want to teach me the game,
in a practise-game???

DragonKing: Settings / Xiangqi.

Is it possible to play here with traditional pieces? I found it easy to learn them especially after a few games and I dislike the western style.

Fwiffo:
I was hoping that someone could start a new tournement for 50 players or more

I was hoping that someone could start a new tournement for 50 players or more

And even 2 spaces diagonal if you are on your side of the board.....

And even blocks the elephant in that direction...

BIG BAD WOLF: Yes, it´s totally safe.

Quick Question:

For the Bishop (Elephant), they can basicly move 2 spaces diagnal. I know if they land on an opponent they capture it, but is it safe to be in the 1 space diagnal from your opponents Elephant?

<Beren> To my knowledge they're traditional yes. The bigger pieces I created are also traditional; they might appear on brainking in the future.

I created a tournament for chess, shogi and xiangqi which starts tomorrow. Anyone who'd like to play one or more of these great chess games in one tournament should enlist quickly!

Fwiffo: Were these traditional characters? I prefer them to simplified. If so, yes I'd still like to play with these.

Why there is no link to download xiangqi games?

gringo:
OK, thanks!

jolat: Try this site http://private.addcom.de/dxb/dxbpuzz.html

There is also a link "2002 competition". May those are more like what you're looking for.

Is this someone knows Internet sites where we can find problems
(puzzles) or ends of games relating to Xiangqi?

Thanks :-)

Fencer: Since both sides has at least Rook, a mate is always possible, although this would require a bad play from one side.......
But if you ask with perfect or with decent play from both sides, if this can be won the answer is no one knows right now!
But anyway the game should continue........

Fencer: I don't know, if it's fair to say something about an ongoing game, but as it doesn't seem to be a tournament game...: Yes you should go on playing. Have in mind, that One Rook vs. Full Defence (properly setup, like at the moment in this game) would be draw, but vs. an uncomplete defence a rook always wins.

at least I would try to win if I were black. I think I could win, but not sure

Since I know almost nothing about endings in Xiangqi, can someone tell me if this game can be won?

Rook
is the most valuable piece. Its worth more than even two cannons, a cannon and a horse or two horses. Valuation may differ, if you give a rook for two very active minor pieces.

Cannon and Horse are the minor pieces and are more or less equal in strength, but their strength differs during the game. In the opening and middle game the cannon is the stronger piece, but in the endgame it becomes weaker because there are less piece on the board to support the cannon. In the endgame a horse is the stronger attacker, while a cannon in many cases is the better defender. Combination of horse and cannon is stronger than two cannons or two horses.

Pawn
Is usually not even worth a tempo in the opening, but may easily win a game in the endgame. Approaching the palast the pawn becomes stronger and stronger and loses strength on the base line.

If you lose your guards, your defence becomes very weak against rooks and horses, while a lack of elephants makes it weak against cannons. **This last quote in very general terms, of course it always depends on the position.**

I'm trying to learn about the game, but could someone post a quick rundown of the importance of each peice.

That is I know in regular chess, Queen is the most important, all the way down to the pawn being the least important.

I created a new xiangqi's Tournament for not rated players and to the rated players of intermediate level (of 1500 to 1800).

Limit of registration: October 20

If you are interested, register you at
http://brainking.com/fr/Tournaments?trg=11747&tri=63763&trnst=0

thanks for reminder fwiffo !

yes a very bad notation system in my opinion :(
F.i.
C8f5 R9h8
Would mean:
Cannon on the 8th file counting from the right seen from reds point of view goes forward five 'squares' - Rook on the ninth file counting from the right seen from of BLUE's point of view goes horizontally to the 8th file

Moving a forward/backward 5... then I have to count to see where it lands!
When you missed a move in replaying, you can't see directly where you made the mistake.
Also it's very tiring to constantly switch to the other point of view. (This is the ninth file... oh no, it's the first!)

So to me it's a disaster.

actually there is a very special notation for xiangqi, which is very different!

<Fencer> done :)

Fencer:
Would it be possible to give the choice between several notations as
it is the case for chess?
Example: h3-e3 (for Ce3)

Fwiffo: Send them to me, please :-)

<beren> So you can start your campaign for a bigger board :)

redsales> I see... and also octagonal pieces are used traditionally. I haven't found good looking ones yet. I agree that it would be nicer to use the real korean ones for korean chess. Makes it more easy to find out which game your playing when you play both chinese and korean chess.
Still, we COULD use chinese till there is a substitute. After all in Tablut chess pieces are used instead of traditional ones.

<beren> I do have bigger pieces available now.

very beautifoul ! thank you fencer for providing them

Fwiffo: the kings are different sizes and characters.

But... you can use the same as for xiangqi! Just another board set-up.

Fwiffo: Changgi is planned too. But I have no nice graphics for it.

If there is going to be a variant of xiangqi, I think korean chess (changgi) would be a good one. (http://www.chessvariants.org/oriental.dir/korean
chess.html)

Marfitalu: Thanks. I did not know that before.
Fwiffo: Ok, thanks anyway.

<Beren> Well, I didn't draw them myself; and the original were this size. As you probably know, just enlarging them would give an ugly result; to correct it would take too much time for me.

Fwiffo: Nice character set, thanks. I would like to use them for games, but bigger might be better. If Fencer would be happy to give us the option of a bigger board, like in western chess, then do you have some bigger pieces available?
Also, some colour options would be good.

< Fencer> On this move http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=1058818&i=7
the rook's background colour isn't transparant but a familiar looking blue colour :)

Now you can switch to the third set of Xiangqi pieces. The newest one has been provided by Fwiffo.

Great.

Done.

It's the same. 0 is just shorter than 10, but you may use 10 as well, if you consider it to be less confusing.

gringo: Sure, it can be easily changed. But I am not sure if I fully understand. You write "from 1 to 0", didn't you mean "from 1 to 10" instead?

Hi Fencer,
did you see my message at the Bug Tracker section?
http://brainking.com/en/ReadBug?bgi=528
It's a small change, but senseful, because otherwise you would have invented another notation system, which nobody else uses.