M Winther wrote on Thu, Apr 27, 2006 09:09 AM UTC:
Are you sure that you got this right? The Mammoth (Mastodon) *jumps*
one or two steps diagonally or orthogonally. It cannot be as valuable
as 6.8. Those evaluation systems don't work because they don't take into
account how pieces *relate* to each other. Nor does the simple counting of
squares work, i.e., its factual power, because it doesn't take into account
that the Mammoth has to flee to every threat and cannot strike back. For
instance, if a rook is threatened by a queen it can strike back on the
orthogonals. The Archbishop can strike back against a threatening bishop,
queen, or knight, but a Mammoth must generally back off before any threat.
I argue that the Archbishop must be clearly more valuable than the
Mammoth.
The Mammoth seems ideal for testing the reliability of evaluation systems.