Single Comment

No one complained about anything. You are right in the statement that it is better to finish the previous ones rather than submit more, but I simply forgot about this variant. I tend to delete variants which I hadn't edited for a long period of time rather than mess around with them even if they can potentially work, since I tend to rise my own criteria. OK. I'll remove this. I have more interesting stuff to offer, but as you decline it, I'll become a good guy and will never post anything beyond 8x8.

Which one of my other submissions, except this one and Trefoil chess (I gave up on both), fails to meet any quality standard? It's extremely interesting.

Not sure what to make of "Anything that can potentially both work and being not described previously, can exist by default." It doesn't seem to apply to this website. Things that have been described previously can be described here, as long as the author properly credits prior art, and 'potentially' doesn't seem good enough.

That's why there are thousands of chess variants, and at least a quarter of them sucks. The bottleneck board is an attempt at originality, again, purely theoretical, but which can be remade in another way, but it seems that it is not encouraged. OK

My claim about Capablanca's chess is proved by the reason why there are so many RN-BN variants. It is beyond non-absurd. Ed Trice, the inventor of Gothic Chess, already described and analyzed the subject and why it is unplayable. In Shafran's chess, after the first and most obvious move, you can attack both opponents' rooks with your bishop. Aside from an array of other flaws which result from this, this is already something that sounds off.

I once promised myself not to post or sell to anyone any rectangular variants, in which I am as uninterested as you in the hexagonal ones. I made a mistake. Sorry.