[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Single Comment Xiangqi vs Orthodox Chess. Missing description (9x9, Cells: 77) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Fergus Duniho wrote on 2011-03-19 UTCThe thing about Xiangqi vs Orthodox Chess is that the former has weak pieces defending a weak royal piece that is confined to a small area, and the latter has strong pieces defending a stronger royal piece that can move around the whole board. Aside from the quick checkmate for Xiangqi, this would be an easy win for the Chess side. It would work better if the two sides switched royal pieces, so that one side had to checkmate or stalemate a General confined to a palace with Xiangqi pieces, and the other side had to checkmate a Chess King with Chess pieces. Even so, there are still difficulties with the game. The Advisors and Elephants are designed for defending a General that is confined to the Palace and is under attack from Xiangqi pieces. They would be less useful for defending a King that can move around the whole board, and their ability to protect the King from Chess pieces would be more feeble. There would also be the problem that Xiangqi pieces are simply weaker than Chess pieces. The side with Chess pieces would still have an easy win. Because one game uses overall weaker pieces than the other, this game is sort of like Major League vs. Little League. It's not a fair fight. Something fairer than this would be Xiangqi vs. Shatranj or Xiangqi vs. Janggi. But even in these, I suspect the Xiangqi side would be more liable to lose.