I wanted to avoid hoppers, because these cause completely new tactical patterns alien to Chess players. I also have an aversion against riders on large boards, because it is not intuitively obvious whether an in-between piece blocks them or not. You really have to count it out all the time.
But lame riders are already better. A lame Slip Queen is about as strong as the Dragon Horse (according to the Diagram). A Crooked Bishop was too strong. It could even be weakened by making it a compound of a lame Skip Bishop and lame Slip Rook (or the other way around; then it would be color bound.) The only thing against it is that it is rather unusual.
Perhaps a divergent mQcN would appeal more to Chess players.
I wanted to avoid hoppers, because these cause completely new tactical patterns alien to Chess players. I also have an aversion against riders on large boards, because it is not intuitively obvious whether an in-between piece blocks them or not. You really have to count it out all the time.
But lame riders are already better. A lame Slip Queen is about as strong as the Dragon Horse (according to the Diagram). A Crooked Bishop was too strong. It could even be weakened by making it a compound of a lame Skip Bishop and lame Slip Rook (or the other way around; then it would be color bound.) The only thing against it is that it is rather unusual.
Perhaps a divergent mQcN would appeal more to Chess players.