Single Comment

Ecumenical Chess. Set of Variants incorporating Camels and Camel compound pieces. (8x10, Cells: 80) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

Joe Joyce wrote on Sat, Dec 27, 2008 02:37 AM UTC:

Recently, HG Muller has demonstrated the values of the queen (BR), Chancellor (NR), and Archbishop (BN) are all actually similar, with the BN within about a pawn value of the queen. Adding the wazir moves to the BN should, I think, kick the value of the piece above that of a queen. John Smith has talked about the coverage within 2 squares of this piece. Let's look at the numbers.
Piece - @1 square - @2 squares - totals/24 - @3 or more
 Q          8            8          16/24        8
 C          4           12          16/24        4
 A          4           12          16/24        4
 X          8           12          20/24        4

The queen is the most powerful at a distance.
The queen, within 2 squares, by virtue of attacking more close squares, is more powerful than the chancellor or archbishop.
X is significantly more powerful than the other 3 pieces up close. 

In my opinion [developed in the CVwiki under 'Attack Fraction'], X is the most powerful of the 4 pieces shown. It is only the queen which ever attacks more squares, and that requires the queen be able to move 4 or more squares unobstructed in all 8 of its possible directions. As a minor note, the Q can't jump, X does. 

Consider counterattacks. A can't attack X unsupported, while X can attack A freely from 4 squares. Q and C attack X freely from 4 squares, X attacks both freely from 8. 

Finally, consider interdiction and checkmate power. If I'm doing this right, Q and C can interdict, but not checkmate by themselves. A can checkmate but not interdict by itself. X can do both.

Conclusion, X wins, hands down, in my opinion.