H. G. Muller wrote on Tue, Apr 11, 2023 03:37 PM UTC:
After considering several other possibilities, I think the best solution to avoid that the Warrior can be used to strengthen a Pawn wall to create an almost unbreakable barrier is to make it more valuable. If Warrior + Pawn are worth more than a typical minor, having a Pawn protected by a Warrior isn't problematic when you bring enough attackers to bear on the Pawn. By giving the Warriors the same diagonally forward capture as a Pawn, it cannot be used to increase the number of low-valued protectors of a Pawn to what it already could be by protecting it with Pawns.
To increase the value without destroying the pawn-like character (i.e. binding to a file, irreversible move) one can endow it with extra captures. The backward Knight captures are suitable for this: these cannot easily be used for strengthening a Pawn chain, as the Warriors cannot overtake Pawns in the same file.
It appears adding the backward half of the Knight captures to a (Metamachy) Pawn is enough to increase the value of a Warrior to slightly over 2 Pawns. A closed wall of Pawns set up on the 2nd rank, used to shield the King, would not behave very differently from the normal Pawn shield.
I am still 'on the fence' for whether 16x16 with high piece density or 18x18 with a more normal density would be better. It seems natural do push Pawns and develop the minors first, and this would automatically create manoeuvring room for the noble pieces behind those. Starting with many empty squares in the camp makes it much more difficult to maintain the threat of a suffocated mate, and thus decreases the usefulness of the flying pieces.
After considering several other possibilities, I think the best solution to avoid that the Warrior can be used to strengthen a Pawn wall to create an almost unbreakable barrier is to make it more valuable. If Warrior + Pawn are worth more than a typical minor, having a Pawn protected by a Warrior isn't problematic when you bring enough attackers to bear on the Pawn. By giving the Warriors the same diagonally forward capture as a Pawn, it cannot be used to increase the number of low-valued protectors of a Pawn to what it already could be by protecting it with Pawns.
To increase the value without destroying the pawn-like character (i.e. binding to a file, irreversible move) one can endow it with extra captures. The backward Knight captures are suitable for this: these cannot easily be used for strengthening a Pawn chain, as the Warriors cannot overtake Pawns in the same file.
It appears adding the backward half of the Knight captures to a (Metamachy) Pawn is enough to increase the value of a Warrior to slightly over 2 Pawns. A closed wall of Pawns set up on the 2nd rank, used to shield the King, would not behave very differently from the normal Pawn shield.
I am still 'on the fence' for whether 16x16 with high piece density or 18x18 with a more normal density would be better. It seems natural do push Pawns and develop the minors first, and this would automatically create manoeuvring room for the noble pieces behind those. Starting with many empty squares in the camp makes it much more difficult to maintain the threat of a suffocated mate, and thus decreases the usefulness of the flying pieces.