I have already practiced the question of concentrating variations in one proposal in ‘Three pieces Chess’ - albeit with a heavy heart.
I have followed the discussion, especially between Kevin and H.G., but can only follow it to a limited extent.
(Off the record, I have to say that I find it somewhat unfair when ‘normal’ standards meet somewhat special circumstances and a congruence cannot be established - I don't want to describe it in detail, but you know what I mean. From my point of view, a little more empathy would be appropriate. The editors don't change anything about their standards - do they? If the editors think they're sending the wrong signals, then it's up to them to express that properly).
I can see some merit in the argument that minor changes to a basic idea require major changes to the course of the game. It's not about minor changes in the movement possibilities of pieces, it's about the effect on the course of the game. In this respect, I was a little hesitant to include the ‘Three pieces Chess extended’ variation in my ‘Three pieces Chess’ proposal.
Short text: One suggestion is as lost as the next! I can understand Kevin here.
That's why I would argue for different variants of my suggestions ‘Knight to Queen Chess’ and ‘Knights and Kings Chess’.
I have already practiced the question of concentrating variations in one proposal in ‘Three pieces Chess’ - albeit with a heavy heart.
I have followed the discussion, especially between Kevin and H.G., but can only follow it to a limited extent.
(Off the record, I have to say that I find it somewhat unfair when ‘normal’ standards meet somewhat special circumstances and a congruence cannot be established - I don't want to describe it in detail, but you know what I mean. From my point of view, a little more empathy would be appropriate. The editors don't change anything about their standards - do they? If the editors think they're sending the wrong signals, then it's up to them to express that properly).
I can see some merit in the argument that minor changes to a basic idea require major changes to the course of the game. It's not about minor changes in the movement possibilities of pieces, it's about the effect on the course of the game. In this respect, I was a little hesitant to include the ‘Three pieces Chess extended’ variation in my ‘Three pieces Chess’ proposal.
Short text: One suggestion is as lost as the next! I can understand Kevin here.
That's why I would argue for different variants of my suggestions ‘Knight to Queen Chess’ and ‘Knights and Kings Chess’.