Enter Your Reply

Gilman's singling out what are called Rook-Colour-One and Rook-Colour-Two
suggests they are better than Land Rook and Water Rook. That is probably
correct. I change my priotizing between the two pairs as of now, in case of
ever putting them into a CV or using the C.D.A line-up. If Gilman wants to re-name
them, that is fine too, just so please continue noting they are invented right here. Recall
Land Rook and Water Rook are not divergent. Land Rook just stays on dark
both modes and Water Rook on light. They both have Ferz one-step option and
remain colourbound -- Rook-counterparts to Bishops. Contrastingly, Rook-One
and Rook-Two are divergent in passive Rookwise and active only on
respective squares light and dark. Their passive mode makes them not colourbound.
There could be a sort of lesson. Water and Land Rooks seem more basic in their not having divergency, but divergent (hence more complicated) Rooks-One and -Two seem to be the 'better' piece-type pair.  Forget Thoreau's ''Simplify, simplify, simplify.''