mangue: Gringo maybe can confirm, but perpetual check lose the game for the attacker, but as the link he references, the rules are so complex, than it is very hard to apply (would require an expert in XiangQi and lots of hours).
The rules are straightforward! Nothing complicated i see..... Also this rule for King checks is valid always:
Under any circumstance, the side that perpetually checks with one piece or several pieces, will be ruled a loss.
if you do perpetual chess, and your opponent too (that is you defend a check with a check),
This can't be done normally, since you have to resolve the check (that means to get out of check) before playing another check to the opponent....
Anencephal: Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.
This is not well defined....
At least 2 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.
At least 3 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.
3 Checks in a row by a piece or multiple pieces.
That is well defined situations.
Normally after 2-3 checks i a row, that repeat the same position periodically, should be a valid way to program it.....
(esconder) Se procura uma mensagem mais antiga de um dado utilizador clique no seu Perfil e use a opção "mostrar mensagensdeste utilizador", no topo da página. (konec) (mostrar todas as dicas)