Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Here are a few more names for the same piece: Thoat (from Jetan, Edgar Rice Burroughs), Emperor (problemist's usage), and Marquis (from Scirocco, Typhoon, and Jupiter by Adrian King, also used in Töws' generic chess piece creation system, in Derzhanski's list of chess pieces, in the Sweeping Switchers by myself, and in Thronschach by Glenn Overby II)

From playing this on ChessV, I have a few thoughts on strategies.

Firstly, 2 orthogonally adjacent Knights are excellent fortresses, and when combined with 1-2 Lions they can easily hide compound pieces to be brought out later for late game scenarios, where said compound will work well (especially Queens and Cardinals).

Another is that despite speed of getting around the board Wizards are weak, probably the weakest non-pawn piece, since they only have 3 (Ralph Betza ) half-knights, they are quite bad at creating mini-fortresses, and unlike Lions and Knights they are colourbound.

Opening, perhaps after e/f pawn advances, with Wizard to their c/h square is a good idea since it frees a Rook, develops your Wizard, blocks opposing Wizards and protects the opposite central pawn. Also, apparently developing minor pieces first is a good idea.

As often said, sliders are considerably more powerful on larger boards, but Knights seem as strong as / stronger than Bishops in this game.

on another note, funny notation for Wizard is LF, not CF. Funny Notation Camels are L (weirdly, since there isn't a capital C)

The NW piece is called a Grand Horse in Roberto Lavieri's ACHERNAR, a Brigadier in Glenn Overby's veSQuj, and a Mule in Lùotuoqí (Camel Chess). The royal pieces in Jason D. Wittman's Mad Chess move like NF (White) and NW (Black).

[EDIT 2023] Mentioned way back in 2001 by Jeff "Cavebear" Stroud (ABC Chess). Charles Daniel uses this piece in Herculean Chess (2008) and Hadean Chess (2010).

I have tested this game a few times, and I can say it is as good as 
Grand-Chess, although with a different taste. Yes, the game tendence is to
moderately long games, with average of 100-120 moves to finish a good
Opulent Chess game, but it does not demerit the game, the game play is
very interesting, deep, rich and, yes, it is very strategic. I like it.

This game looks to be very strategic; I would venture to say that this game
has about the same strategy/tactics balance as FIDE Chess, while being
richer in both aspects.  The main disadvantage appears to be that this
variant will probably result in longer games than FIDE chess; a blitz game
is probably game/10 or game/15 instead of game/5; a tournament game would
probably take four to six hours instead of two hours.

I especially like Greg Strong's method of coming up with this opening
setup.  Perhaps a similar heuristic can be designed so that a random chess
variant makes for a playable game (the pieces are chosen randomly or
semi-randomly, then the opening setup is chosen at random until we find
one with a good balance).