Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

In the comment thread for Chess-and-a-half I recently made a comment about new inventors tending to be too ambitious and creating too many rules, detracting from the quality of the game. To provide another example of this phenomenon, I will now pick on myself :)

This was the first game I invented, and, in retrospect, it has way too many rules. It should have been: all rules exactly as orthodox chess with only one addition - instead of making another move, a knight may be morphed into a bishop or vice-versa. That's it. The ability to also morph into knishops and bishights probably makes the game play worse and definitely makes it less likely that anyone will want to play. Also, the ability for black to select a different array - particularly one with 4 bishops - is definitely bad, as four bishops is too powerful.

It was my first invention and I got carried away. When I get a chance, I will update this page to make the game exactly as I just described.

These polymorphic pieces remind me a little of the Spearman from John William Brown's Centennial Chess and of Mats Winther's Elk in Elk Chess (with Scorpions) and Elkrider in Elkrider Chess.

Elk changes to knight or rook, Elkrider to rook or nightrider, depending on the color of its square. Gary Gifford's remote sensing mimic pieces used in Remote Sensing and Remote Sensing with On and Off Board Detection, also have their movements contingent upon the color of the squares upon which they are situated.

The Spearmen, also used in Mark Hedden's Ganymede Chess, can change from one type of bidirectional line piece to another at the end of their move. Or they can rotate / switch without moving. The strength of optional mutability in spearmen is weakened by the fact they can only capture when moving forward.

If I understand correctly, changes in polymorphic pieces in Polymorph Chess always count as moves in themselves (apart from Black's option to make one of four sets of switches in the beginning).