Single Comment

You have to be careful with that kind of reasoning. If the Guanaca had more
captures, it might very wel be worth more than a light piece intrinsically,
and you would not even want to trade it for a light piece. 

There are some pieces for which your reasoning works, e.g. the Camel on an
8x8 board. this is basically a useless piece in the end-game; the side that
has it will almost always lose it without compensation. The opening value
seems to be purely derived by its forking power on a densely populated
board allowing it to be trded for something else. (In the end-game you can
often not even trad it for a Pawn...)

The intrinsic value of a piece is usually determined by how well it
cooperates with the King in positions with several Pawns, to protect its
own Pawns and support their advance, and to gobble up the opponent's and
stop their advance. This is how most Chess games end, so a piece that does
well there has a really large impact on the average performance. Despite
its fairly large number of posible targets, the Camel is totally inept in
this respect: the targets are non-contiguous and mostly far apart, and if
they are not actually off board, they are still too far away for useful
manouevring, once there are ony very few 'centers of activity'. Hoppers
might also best be gotten rid of before the late end-game, although a
Cannon does remain dangerous even with the tiniest supporting material
(e.g Cannon + Ferz makes a won end-game against a bare King).
Grasshoppers definitely get useless very quickly.

But the Guanaca is not particularly bad against Pawns. So I expect most of
its value is intrinsic, and making it more powerful by adding moves would
up its intrinsic value faster than the ease to trade it for B or N.