Single Comment

Hey, Gary! Agreed Go is not a chess variant. It is at once much simpler and
more complex than chess. I was using it as an example of a 'large' board
game that has about the simplest, least powerful pieces possible. They
just exist, they don't even move. The game is played 1 stone at a time.
For those of us who are not experts, there isn't even a clearly defined
end to the game. But it is an awesome game, and conceptually much simpler
than chess. On a big board. Consider it a point in game-space, that
nebulous conceptual area where all games reside, just outside a boundary
of chess. It's like 'Little Wars' in that respect, using much of the
trappings of chess-like games, but being clearly outside the boundary. So
we can define 'chess' by triangulation, if you like, or not, if not.
As to my statement about the size & range trend, it was in strict reference to my
designs. I apologize for not making that clear. Specifically, with
reference to Hyperchess, Walkers and Jumpers, and my large shatranj
variants, the statement is [reasonably] true. BTW, I hope you like the new
piece designs for Grand Shatranj, Gary. 
I will admit to being somewhat tongue-in-cheek in my whole approach to
this topic, though. Just because they're attacking my whole design
philosophy of minimalism and simplicity is not reason enough to get all
exercised. ;-)
Enjoy. Joe