Simple compound is for a piece with only one move type.
Since I contrast simple pieces with compound pieces, I would not refer to simple compounds.
Hybrid is for a piece capable of 2 different types of move.
Instead of using a different word than compound, I will just distinguish the kind of compound I'm speaking of.
I just think splitting Leaper Compounds into Double-Pattern & Triple-Pattern is neat.
I think it is less confusing to use the same term when the meaning doesn't change. I have now broken "Leaper Compounds" into "Double Leaper Compounds" and "Triple Leaper Compounds."
Darter is a term for a blockable leaper
Lame leaper is the more established term, and I don't understand the significance of calling them darters.
Leaper-Rider is a type of piece that makes a leap & may continue riding
Ralph Betza has already given us the term bent rider, and I want to favor established terminology over the use of new terms.
An X/Y-sniper travels like piece X & captures like piece Y, so Murray Lion is an Alibaba/Pasha Sniper.
I was thinking of rifle pieces, since rifles are usually used for sniping. Since a Pasha is a compound of a Man and an Alibaba, I don't think it properly counts as an X/Y-sniper. The examples Anthony Dickins gives for Snipers in A Guide to Fairy Chess have no overlapping capturing and non-capturing moves. In this case, though, one is a subset of the other, and if you allow that, all divergent pieces may be counted as Snipers. Since divergent is the more common term, and the Murray Lion has overlapping capturing and non-capturing moves, I do not favor calling it a Sniper.
Argentinian Pieces aren't of Argentinian origin either.
Since I don't think either one of us have been using that as a category, it's not a point in favor of placing Leo and Vao in a Chinese piece category.
Since I contrast simple pieces with compound pieces, I would not refer to simple compounds.
Instead of using a different word than compound, I will just distinguish the kind of compound I'm speaking of.
I think it is less confusing to use the same term when the meaning doesn't change. I have now broken "Leaper Compounds" into "Double Leaper Compounds" and "Triple Leaper Compounds."
Lame leaper is the more established term, and I don't understand the significance of calling them darters.
Ralph Betza has already given us the term bent rider, and I want to favor established terminology over the use of new terms.
I was thinking of rifle pieces, since rifles are usually used for sniping. Since a Pasha is a compound of a Man and an Alibaba, I don't think it properly counts as an X/Y-sniper. The examples Anthony Dickins gives for Snipers in A Guide to Fairy Chess have no overlapping capturing and non-capturing moves. In this case, though, one is a subset of the other, and if you allow that, all divergent pieces may be counted as Snipers. Since divergent is the more common term, and the Murray Lion has overlapping capturing and non-capturing moves, I do not favor calling it a Sniper.
Since I don't think either one of us have been using that as a category, it's not a point in favor of placing Leo and Vao in a Chinese piece category.