Single Comment

Betza's C.D.A. and articles on piece-values merge, so piece-type discussion can just stay put here. Now below exampled C.D.A. Water Rook Army illustrates disparate piece-type Rooks, newly invented this moment. Water Rook can only move to light squares rookwise and Land Rook only to dark squares rookwise. Just split into two Rook-types the same way Bishops are already split the 500 (or 800) years of their existence. So Water Rook Army arrangement is 'Water Rook-Knight-Bishop-Amazon-King-Bishop-Knight-Land Rook'. Piece-values are 3-3-3-13-x-3-3-3 for 31.0 +/- 0.5. Are Water Rook and Land Rook different piece-types? Of course they are, just as Orthodox standard light and dark Bishop are. Their paired modalities are comparable the four piece-type cases, as are their values about 3.0. As a result too the thankfully-proliferated chess literature, all tracts and monographs since circa 1500, become exclusively ''Bishop'' and ''Rook'' for convenience, elides over the true intrinsic building-up. Counterpart to the Bishops combined are the Rooks combined, four piece-types, four definitional types in this evident development, and there is no loss at all or harm in understanding to just say 'Bishop' singly, as mediaeval counterpart-designers finally did. It was rather hard also let's say instead for emerged renaissance man to get from Ferz and Alfil conceptually to Bishop the double piece -- being *double* in three or four senses(count them up). Water Rook versus Immortal AntiClericals for a C.D.A. match-up, having clear pointwise equivalence? Then there is the incipient family as well of subvariants to these main-themed Immortal AntiCericals' preferred line-up of one I.M. only, based on specific 'Rook-Immortal Man-Barrier Pawn-Queen-King-Barrier Pawn-Immortal Man-Rook'. Their '(5.5 + 0.5) twice' keeps (31.0 +/- 0.5)-point probable range. Ralph's frequent core format-pairing is kept by implementing not one but two I.M. and two B.P. with neither Knights nor Bishops in that prospective subvariant cluster. Strategy radicalizes with two I.M.; and one, as originally, would seem optimum with or without promotion mutually 'B.P. <-> I.M'.