Check out Glinski's Hexagonal Chess, our featured variant for May, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Derek Nalls wrote on Wed, Apr 5, 2006 02:34 AM UTC:
Thank you for publishing my results.  Doing so implies that you have some
trust in my calculation method even as it differs from your own and the
English-German language barrier creates apprehension.

We are all trying to reach the same destination (accurate relative piece
values).  We just have different reasons for taking different roads in
pursuit of it.  Unfortunately, the subject is just too complicated to be
approached exclusively from math and geometry as applied to games.  Where
value judgments are necessarily required (for instance, in determining the
details of a formula and what 'looks right' based only upon estimated
material values of pieces in well-established games that seem to work
well), philosophy becomes involved.  Thereafter, the dangerous line
between 'the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics' and 'the
unreasonable ineffectiveness of philosophy' (to quote Dr. Steven
Weinberg) is approached.

For what it is worth, your set of material values for pieces in CRC fall
into the safe, flat scale between the relatively compressed scale of Trice
and the relatively expanded scale of Nalls.  So, if there is anything at
all reliable within the work of any of the 3 of us, then your calculations
for pieces in CRC are either the most accurate or the 2nd most accurate.

Edit Form

Comment on the page Capablanca Random Chess

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.
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.