I don't think there was any suggestion that the idea is no good, or the implementation was flawed. Just that the presentated explanation of it is very cumbersome.
I agree with Bn Em that it would be much better explained by not presenting this as pieces that change, but just stating that the orthodox pieces get some extra moves on some of the squares. And then show a table that mentions the extra moves for each piece, and on which squares it would get those.
I don't think there was any suggestion that the idea is no good, or the implementation was flawed. Just that the presentated explanation of it is very cumbersome.
I agree with Bn Em that it would be much better explained by not presenting this as pieces that change, but just stating that the orthodox pieces get some extra moves on some of the squares. And then show a table that mentions the extra moves for each piece, and on which squares it would get those.