💡📝Kevin Pacey wrote on Fri, Apr 6, 2018 10:49 PM UTC:
You're welcome. I've fixed the spelling, I think.
An official comment I saw on the Omega Chess commercial page assessing the strength of the B and CH on its 10x10 board (with 4 extra corner cells, too) was that B=4, CH=4 but it was recommended not to trade B for CH (at least before endgame?). Though I take B=4 or more Pawns always with a grain of salt, even for on such a large board size, the comment fits in with my tentative values as far as having the CH estimated as less than 4, and not quite worth a B, on the larger 12x10 board size of Wide Nightrider Chess, where a B would if anything improve more than the CH in value.
As a crude rule of thumb for chess [variants] in general, at least when cleanly ahead, e.g. a pawn, for no compensation, a FIDE chess master once advised me to normally just trade piece for same piece type, rather than getting into a material imbalance, if merely by numerical point value it seemed a good idea, as we don't know enough about how such imbalances work out in practice always, but a clear pawn ahead is a clear pawn ahead.
You're welcome. I've fixed the spelling, I think.
An official comment I saw on the Omega Chess commercial page assessing the strength of the B and CH on its 10x10 board (with 4 extra corner cells, too) was that B=4, CH=4 but it was recommended not to trade B for CH (at least before endgame?). Though I take B=4 or more Pawns always with a grain of salt, even for on such a large board size, the comment fits in with my tentative values as far as having the CH estimated as less than 4, and not quite worth a B, on the larger 12x10 board size of Wide Nightrider Chess, where a B would if anything improve more than the CH in value.
As a crude rule of thumb for chess [variants] in general, at least when cleanly ahead, e.g. a pawn, for no compensation, a FIDE chess master once advised me to normally just trade piece for same piece type, rather than getting into a material imbalance, if merely by numerical point value it seemed a good idea, as we don't know enough about how such imbalances work out in practice always, but a clear pawn ahead is a clear pawn ahead.