Single Comment

Brown's value table is poor in not having very accurate estimates 6 of the 9 p-ts, excluding King. At the same time cv Centennial is very good, ranked #14 at Next Chess threads started 2008 of over 1000 cvs eligible Track I, being more conventional chess inventions closer to f.i.d.e. than Track II cv-category. To avoid time-consuming programming, the more related piece-types and cvs the values-estimator can compare or recall to the present cv, the better the approximations. Designers often consider many rules-modifiers in constructing preferred subvariants, throwing majority away, and each rules change has effect on values: promotion, starting array, alternate win condition, potentially ad infinitum. Change a rule and piece-values have to practically start from scratch. Since promotion is not a factor every game score played, Steward should be about twice Pawn value. Rotating Spearman is weaker even that ordinary Pawn. Colourbound inhibited Camel should be to Knight 2:3 even on 10x10. Rook to Queen 5 to 9 looks stable and Bishop 3. So Brown's original table to this revision works: Pawn 0.6 -> 1.0, Steward quadra-pawn 0.9 -> 2.0, Knight 2.6 -> 3.0, Camel 2.5 -> 2.0, Rotating Spearman 2.5 -> 2.0, Bishop n.c. 3.0, Queen n.c. 9.0, Murray Lion 4.4 -> 4.0. The Lion reduction is mostly in view of larger 10x10. //// 1) Which would be weakest most embodiments, Barrier Pawn of Kristensen's or Rotating Spearman of Centennial or Betza's Negative Relay Knight? 2) Is Murray Lion + K sufficient to mate?