Single Comment

Abdul-Rahman Sibahi, Thank you for commenting.  Your idea would certainly work and I did think about it back when the game first appeared.  The way I imagined it was simple, accomplished by linking pawns: K and Q pawns, both B Pawns, both Knight Pawns, both Rook Pawns... each a Doppelganger to their 'linked' associate. Since Pawns change files from time to time, they would need an identifier to show Doppelganger relations. 

I prefer the idea of more player control which exists in the current version.    As to which is the better concept?  That probably is a matter of opinion, like comparing Chinese Chess and Korean Chess.  On that call, I am in the minority.

Your idea is certainly logical, has merit, and would prove easier for programmers.  I sort of like coming across games that computers do not yet play... but usually it is only a matter of time before they do.  

I seem to recall seeing a set of pieces with different colors at the bases.  Pawns of that design would work with your suggestion.

If you want-I will add the variant to Doppelganger and call it something like 'the Abdul-Rahman Sibahi Doppelganger Variant' and give you credit. You could modify the pawn Doppelganger aspect if desired, based on proximity.  There are several different pawn-link possibilities. Just let me know.  Or, if you'd like to create a separate page with your rules - as your variant of Doppelganger - I have no problem with that.  It would need its own pre-set to keep the ratings aspect fair. 

Thanks again, very much, for the comment.  Best regards, Gary