George Duke wrote on Fri, May 2, 2008 05:47 PM UTC:
Joe Joyce and J.J. are referring to Minister ( Knight + Dabbabah + Wazir )
and Priestess ( Knight + Alfil + Ferz ). Ralph Betza's Chess Different
Armies has FAD ( Ferz + Alfil + Dabbabah ). That took a minute to recall
and find. I am quite sure (N+D+W) and (N+A+F) are not new and appear under
different name(s) some time ago, and it would be less misleading to use
earlier names. They did not originate with uncreative A.B.Shatranj or such
other recently. When previous use(s) found, I will post them, as we have
done with some other ''re-inventions.'' These pieces are unappealing,
all three, because they have unnatural foreshortened Rook or Bishop
dimension in their triple-compounding. There is no compelling logic. They
are pulled out of a hat from hundreds possibilities. Why not use pieces
going one-, two-, and three- either Rook- or Bishop-wise? No reason. No
improvement of any CV set-up by limiting to up-to-two or -three radially.
That is why Bishop and Rook themselves will always stand as perfection.
Piece Values inherently, however, are interesting intellectual activity
and topic. However, in perspective, not because of the utility of these
particular mediocre choices, ''Minister,'' ''Priestess,'' FAD. (Another Comment
may take up Amazon and the others as to their deficiencies.) Instead,
because facility at computing values can then attempt to apply to
better piece-movement concepts, such as Rococo units, these are worthwhile
enough threads on Piece Values.
