Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
I understand your points. If there was 1 BN on b1/b12 and 1 RN on k1/k12 only, all your specs would be respected: all pieces can move behind the lines, all pawns are protected, the Cannons keep their mobility. Just there is no symmetry for BN and RN, but there is no symmetry for Queen either and this is not illogical. I have understood that the reason why you had 2 BNs,2 RNs is because you owned 2 physical Gothic chess sets. An option to play with a single BN/RN set would be worth to consider maybe. Just wondering.
I understand your points. If there was 1 BN on b1/b12 and 1 RN on k1/k12 only, all your specs would be respected: all pieces can move behind the lines, all pawns are protected, the Cannons keep their mobility.
This setup leaves an empty space on a1 without any piece able to move to it, which adds an element of arbitrariness to the setup that I don't like. It also reduces the usefulness of the Cannon and Vao by giving them fewer valuable pieces to potentially pick off, and it removes the chance of a Vao threatening to eventually capture a Rook or Marshall along a diagonal.
Just there is no symmetry for BN and RN, but there is no symmetry for Queen either and this is not illogical.
It increases the asymmetry in the game, which I prefer to avoid.
I have understood that the reason why you had 2 BNs,2 RNs is because you owned 2 physical Gothic chess sets. An option to play with a single BN/RN set would be worth to consider maybe.
If we did that, it might work better to put the Archbishop by the King and to put the Queen and Marshall in the corners. Since the Queen is more powerful, it could go on the Kingside corner. This would take care of some of the objections I had. However, I would otherwise prefer to keep the Queen by the King, which is the more traditional position for this piece, and having two Marshalls and Archbishops better accommodates this.
@Jean-Louis
You can always make a preset with "Gross Chess - Cazaux variation" though. I'll try it with you! I'm quite sure Fergus won't be bothered!
Thanks Aurelian, but I won't. I was just wondering if Gross chess could be good with less material because I would have made it like this if I had been the inventor. But, I'm not and it is normal that we have different views, tastes, etc. Moreover, I'm a terrible player so my opinion is not a reference. Thanks for all replies. It's nice to have a place like this to discuss. In any case, Gross Chess is OK as is, and one of the most popular on this place.
A. M. DeWitt wrote on Fri, Sep 30, 2022 04:07 PM UTC:Fergus, you might want to update your hyperlinks, especially the link to the GC preset page for this game. Right now, it is not working because the page was moved.
Is it just subject threads or also comments I can't post?
7 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
Along the lines you imagined, it makes valuable pieces less prone to capture by pieces that can hop or leap over the Pawn lines. Since the Vao is the least valuable piece, it is the piece least in need of having an escape route. Notably, Chinese Chess, which introduced the Cannon, leaves more space around the pieces than Chess does.